pptx_delete_comment

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true; the description adds that deletion can target one or all comments, and that output_path defaults to overwriting the input. It mentions the return value is 'Status with deletion details', providing sufficient behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 and well-structured, with a clear purpose statement followed by Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds necessary information without redundancy.

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 absence of an output schema, the description specifies the return type as 'Status with deletion details', which is adequate. It covers the core behavior but does not address error scenarios or edge cases; however, for a delete tool, this level of detail is reasonable.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions, but the description adds critical context: comment_index is optional and omitting it deletes all comments. This behavior is not fully captured in the schema, adding value.

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 deletes comments from a slide, specifying two modes: deleting a single comment by index or all comments when index is omitted. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pptx_delete_slide, excel_delete_comment, etc.

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 two usage modes (one comment vs all) and indicates required parameters (file_path, slide_number). However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or comparisons with alternatives, though the sibling context makes it clear it's for pptx comments.

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