previous_slide

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It clearly states that the tool navigates to the previous slide or build, which is a simple action. An explicit mention of whether it wraps around or has no effect if already at the first slide would improve transparency, but the current description is adequate.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and context. Every word is necessary and there is no redundancy.

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 navigation tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is fully complete. It covers what the tool does and when it should be used (during an active slideshow). No additional information is needed.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). The description adds no parameter information, which is unnecessary given the lack of parameters. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate as the description does not need to compensate for schema gaps.

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 specifies the verb 'goes back' and the resource 'previous slide or build during an active Keynote slideshow'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'next_slide' and 'go_to_slide' by focusing on backward navigation within an active slideshow.

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 explicitly states the prerequisite 'during an active Keynote slideshow', providing clear context for when to use the tool. While it does not list alternatives or when not to use, the sibling tools imply differentiation, and the condition is sufficient for correct usage.

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