slides_replace_all_text

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears full burden. It only states the basic action without disclosing behavioral traits: whether the change is reversible, if it affects text in tables/shapes, any limits on length, or default matching behavior (case-insensitive). The matchCase parameter is in schema but not mentioned in 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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose. No redundant words or information.

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?

For a simple find-and-replace tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but not comprehensive. It doesn't mention that the operation spans all slides, nor what the return value might be (e.g., number of replacements). Sibling tools are mostly unrelated, so no direct conflicts.

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%, with each parameter described (find, replace, matchCase, presentationId). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Find and replace text across all slides in a Google Slides presentation', specifying the verb (find and replace), resource (text across all slides), and platform. It distinguishes from sibling tools like slides_insert_text (which inserts at locations) or docs_find_replace (for Docs).

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 vs alternatives (e.g., slides_batch_update for bulk modifications, slides_insert_text for targeted inserts). It doesn't mention that the operation affects the entire presentation globally, which could be unintended. No exclusions or prerequisites are provided.

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