List Slides

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers safety, so the description adds useful context by explaining the default behavior ('None = active presentation') and the return format. However, it does not disclose error conditions or other behavioral details, though annotations cover the main mutation risk.

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-structured: a one-sentence purpose, a clear Args section, and a Returns section. Every sentence adds value, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 list operation with one optional parameter, the description covers the parameter semantics and return shape. It lacks a pointer to sibling tools like list_open_presentations, but it provides enough information to invoke the tool correctly in most cases.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it explicitly explains that the single parameter is a 'Presentation name or path' and clarifies that None means the active presentation. This goes well beyond the bare string type in the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List slides in an open presentation, with index and title text.' It clearly communicates what the tool does, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools such as list_shapes or get_presentation_info.

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 only usage context is 'in an open presentation.' There is no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives or when not to use it, which is especially relevant given the large set of slide-related sibling tools.

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