extract_slide_text

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates safety, and the description adds useful behavioral context: it extracts all text content and includes speaker notes. There is no contradiction."

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 one succinct sentence with no filler, and it front-loads the core purpose. Every word adds value."

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?

Combined with the readOnlyHint and existing output schema, the description is adequate for a read-only extraction tool. However, it omits important invocation details such as the slide_index convention and the meaning/behavior of the optional presentation_id parameter.

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 0%, and the description provides no parameter-level detail. It does not clarify whether slide_index is zero-based, whether presentation_id selects the active presentation, or any constraints on these fields."

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 uses a specific verb ('extract'), names the resource ('slide text'), and clearly scopes it to 'a specific slide'. It also distinguishes itself from extract_presentation_text by including speaker notes and focusing on a single 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?

The use case is implied by the wording: extract from one slide rather than the whole presentation. However, there are no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use instructions or named alternatives such as extract_presentation_text or manage_speaker_notes, leaving some routing to inference.

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