create_presentation_from_content

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns a job ID and suggests polling check_job_status, but does not cover auth requirements or potential side effects. Still, the async nature is clearly communicated.

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?

Single paragraph with front-loaded purpose, each sentence earns its place. No redundancy or verbosity.

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?

Covers main purpose, usage, parameter behaviors, return value (job ID), and sibling distinction. Lacks examples for callback_url or further detail on output, but overall sufficient for an async creation tool.

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%, but description adds significant extra context: details on preservationMode (which modes require slideCount), topic override vs instruction, and cross-reference to create_presentation_from_topic for exportType options.

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 transforms raw text into a polished presentation, specifies the use case (caller has prose/notes), and distinguishes from sibling tools like create_presentation_from_file for file uploads.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (when caller has prose/notes) and when not (for file uploads use create_presentation_from_file). Also explains preservationMode behaviors and dependencies.

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