Duplicate Slide

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

Annotations provide only a title, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently states the insertion position and return format, but does not explicitly note that the operation modifies the presentation, preserves the original, or copies all slide content.

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 compact and well-organized, with the core behavior front-loaded and Args/Returns sections adding only necessary parameter and return information. No filler or 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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers invocation and return value adequately. It is slightly incomplete by not explaining how to reference the presentation in multi-presentation contexts or how the new slide is identified beyond its index.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description supplies essential meaning beyond the schema: presentation is 'name or path (None = active presentation)' and index is '1-based' and 'required'. It loses a point because the 'required' statement conflicts with the schema's optional/default-null definition.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('Duplicate'), resource ('a slide'), and detail ('inserting the copy immediately after the original'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like add_slide, delete_slide, or move_slide.

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?

It clarifies that index is required and presentation defaults to the active presentation, but it does not explicitly contrast this with alternatives such as add_slide or when a duplicate is preferable. The 'required' claim also conflicts with the schema's lack of required fields, making the guidance slightly unreliable.

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