pptx_add_table

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only and non-destructive behavior, which description does not contradict. The description adds that header rows are bold and provides default dimensions, but lacks details on error handling, file modification behavior, or what the 'Status' return implies.

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 concise, consisting of a brief two-sentence overview followed by a structured parameter list. Every sentence is informative and necessary.

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 9 parameters (3 required) and no output schema, the description adequately explains purpose, parameters, and return value. However, it could be more complete by specifying behavior on missing files or slide numbers, and by clarifying the return type.

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?

The description adds value beyond the input schema by providing examples (e.g., ['Phase', 'Duration', 'Deliverables']) and explaining default values (left=1.0", top=2.0"). However, the schema already covers 44% of parameters with descriptions, so the description is supplementary.

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 'Add a data table to a slide' and elaborates on creating tables with column headers and optional data rows, specifying that the header row is bold. It is distinct from sibling tools which focus on other operations (e.g., excel_add_chart, pptx_add_slide).

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 explains the tool's functionality but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like office_table or excel_add_chart. No explicit exclusions or context for selection are given.

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