get_oral_presentation_script_prompt

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the output (slide-by-slide breakdown with specific sections) but does not disclose whether it is read-only, requires authentication, or any potential side effects.

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 a single sentence plus a concise list of slide sections. Every part is relevant and there is no wasted wording.

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?

Given the tool has five parameters with 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to explain any parameter meaning or provide context on how to use them. The output is partially described but missing details on the return format despite having an output schema.

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%, and the description does not mention any of the five parameters (congress, study_description, key_message, audience, duration_minutes) or their meaning. While parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description adds no value beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool drafts a timed oral presentation script for a congress with a slide-by-slide breakdown, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_speaker_notes_prompt or get_slide_deck_outline_prompt.

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?

The description implies the tool is for drafting oral presentation scripts but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like get_speaker_notes_prompt, nor does it mention when not to use it.

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