createEcosystemMapSlide

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states 'create or update' implying mutation, but provides no details on side effects, idempotency, permissions, or what happens to existing data. The description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the verb.

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?

Description is a single sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. It is not verbose, but could be broken into multiple sentences or bullet points for better readability. It is adequate but not exemplary.

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, no annotations, and many sibling tools, the description is too brief. It does not specify return value, pagination, or how updates differ from creation. The tool's behavior in a slide-producing context is under-specified.

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 only 33% (only '_index' has a description). The description does not explain what 'entities' and 'categories' represent or how they relate to the map. Agents must rely on parameter names and required fields, which is insufficient.

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?

Description clearly states 'create or update an ecosystem or partner map' with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'createPartnershipMapSlide', which may cause confusion.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'createPartnershipMapSlide', nor any prerequisites or exclusion criteria. The agent is left to infer usage context.

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