pptx_hide_slide

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

The description fully discloses behavior: hidden slides are skipped but editable, output_path defaults to overwriting input, and returns a status with visibility state. This adds context beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) without contradiction.

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 structured with purpose first, then behavioral details, then a parameter list. It is fairly concise but includes an explanatory sentence about hidden slides that adds value. Minor inefficiency: the Args section largely mirrors the schema.

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 no output schema, the description adequately describes return value. It covers all parameters, explains behavior and use cases, and provides enough context for an agent to use the tool correctly alongside sibling tools.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats parameter descriptions but adds minimal extra meaning beyond what's in the schema. However, it mentions the return value (status with visibility state), which is absent from the input 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 'Hide or unhide a slide' with a specific verb and resource. It explains the behavior of hidden slides (skipped but editable) and their use cases (backup or speaker-only material), distinguishing it from slide deletion or addition.

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 when to use (for backup/ speaker-only material) but does not explicitly exclude alternatives like deletion. Among siblings, this is the only hide/unhide tool, so usage is clear, but no explicit when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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