createTamSamSomSlide

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It says 'create or update' but does not explain what 'update' entails (e.g., overwrite, merge, append), nor does it describe side effects, required permissions, or how existing slides are affected. The _index parameter hints at positioning but is not explained in the description.

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 very concise (one sentence, 10 words) and front-loaded. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity. It is not 'minimum viable' because key behavioral and parameter information is missing.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and many sibling tools, the description is too sparse. It does not specify what the numbers represent, how updates work, or how the tool fits into the slide creation workflow. An AI agent would lack sufficient context to use it correctly.

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 20% (only _index has a description). The description adds no meaning to tam, sam, som, or notes. Even though tam/sam/som are common acronyms, the description does not explain their meanings (e.g., Total Addressable Market, etc.) or expected units/format. The count-inflation baseline would be 3 if coverage were high, but here coverage is low and description does not compensate.

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 it creates or updates a TAM/SAM/SOM slide, which is a specific resource type among many sibling slide creation tools. The verb 'Create or update' is explicit, and the resource 'market size (TAM/SAM/SOM) slide' distinguishes it from other slide types.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus other slide creation tools. The description does not mention scenarios, prerequisites, or alternative tools. Given many sibling tools, explicit usage criteria would help differentiate.

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