createIntegrationPlanSlide

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'create or update' but does not disclose behavioral traits such as authorization requirements, side effects (e.g., overwriting existing slides), rate limits, or whether the operation is reversible.

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 short sentence, which is concise but may be too brief. It lacks important details that could be accommodated without verbosity, earning a middling score for structure.

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 annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, error states, or the behavior when updating versus creating, leaving the agent with insufficient context for correct invocation.

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%, yet the description does not explain any parameters or their semantics. The description adds no value beyond what the input schema provides, leaving agents to infer parameter meaning from names and schemas alone.

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 action (create or update) and the specific resource (post-merger integration plan placeholder), making it distinct from sibling slide creation tools. The resource type 'PMI plan placeholder' is specific and unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other slide creation tools like createGanttSimpleSlide). It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context for appropriate use.

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