createKeyMessageWithSupportsSlide

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 limitations, side effects, or what happens when an invalid index is provided. The schema covers the _index behavior, but the description lacks additional behavioral context.

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 (two sentences), front-loads the key action and resource, and avoids unnecessary details. Every sentence serves a clear purpose.

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?

The description adequately explains the tool's purpose and input requirements. However, with no output schema and no mention of return values or side effects, it leaves some gaps, especially for a mutation tool. Overall, it is minimally complete.

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 schema already provides full descriptions for all three parameters (100% coverage). The description reinforces the purpose of 'headline' and 'supports' but adds little new semantic value beyond what the schema offers.

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 creates or updates a slide emphasizing a single key message with headline and bullet points. It effectively distinguishes from the many sibling slide creation tools that target specific presentation structures.

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 advises that the headline should state the main message and that at least two supporting bullet points are required, which guides usage. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or when not to use it.

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