pptx-to-markdown

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Convert' implies a transformation operation, but it doesn't disclose whether this is read-only or destructive, what permissions are needed, whether it handles large files, what happens on failure, or what the output format looks like. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic operation.

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 extremely concise at just 5 words: 'Convert a PPTX file to markdown'. Every word earns its place, with no wasted text. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and couldn't be more efficient while still conveying the basic operation.

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 file conversion tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what the markdown output contains (slides, text, images?), where the output goes, what formats are supported, or any error conditions. With rich sibling tools and conversion being a non-trivial operation, more context 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'filepath' well-documented in the schema as 'Absolute path of the PPTX file to convert'. The description doesn't add any parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, but with complete schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose: 'Convert a PPTX file to markdown' specifies the verb (convert) and resource (PPTX file). It distinguishes from most siblings by specifying PPTX format, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other document converters like docx-to-markdown beyond the file type.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple sibling conversion tools (docx-to-markdown, pdf-to-markdown, etc.), there's no indication of when PPTX conversion is appropriate versus other formats, nor any prerequisites or constraints mentioned.

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