extract_slide_content

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, performance implications, error handling, or prerequisites like slide existence. Merely stating 'extract' is insufficient for transparency.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It captures the essential purpose without 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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain what the tool returns and in what format. It does not mention return structure, success indicators, or how the outputFormat parameter affects results. Incomplete for a tool with four parameters.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds high-level context ('including text, tables, and optionally images') but does not directly enhance understanding of parameters like outputFormat or includeImages beyond what the schema provides.

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 specific verb 'extract' and resource 'content from a Figma slide including text, tables, and optionally images'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_table_data or get_node_info by targeting comprehensive extraction.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_table_data, get_annotations, or get_node_info. The description lacks when-not-to-use or context for choosing between this and similar extraction tools.

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