get_slide_info

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe read-only nature is established. The description adds little behavioral context beyond that, but it does not contradict the annotation and is consistent with a read-only information retrieval operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very short and front-loaded, with no filler. However, it mostly restates the title and adds little substantive value, so the conciseness comes at the cost of useful specification.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With two parameters, zero schema descriptions, no usage guidance, and many sibling tools, the description is too thin to fully equip an agent. The output schema helps explain return values, but the role of presentation_id and the relationship to the current presentation remain unclear.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description needed to clarify what slide_index and presentation_id mean. The phrase 'a specific slide' loosely implies slide_index, but presentation_id is entirely unexplained, leaving an optional parameter whose role is ambiguous.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('a specific slide'), making the core operation clear. It is distinguishable from siblings like get_presentation_info and get_template_file_info by its focus on an individual slide, though 'information' is somewhat vague.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_presentation_info, extract_slide_text, or manage_slide_transitions. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or scenarios where another sibling would be more appropriate.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.