Narrareach

List drafts

list_drafts

Read-only

List the authenticated user's drafts, newest first. Excludes archived drafts and returns compact summaries without full HTML content. kind is note for a Note (pass its id to create_article_from_note): a draft saved as a Note, or one only ever scheduled as a Note with no article settings. Everything else, including an unscheduled create_draft result, is article.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_drafts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Max number of drafts to return (1–100). Default 25.
`query`	No	Optional case-insensitive substring match against the draft title.
`status`	No	Optional status filter.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	Yes
`drafts`	Yes
`connectedAccount`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 9, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / drafts / items / properties / kind

Added value: +{
+  "enum": [
+    "note",
+    "article"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedOutput schema / properties / drafts / items / required

Previous value: -[
-  "id",
-  "title",
-  "status",
-  "updatedAt",
-  "createdAt",
-  "publishedTo",
-  "publishedCount",
-  "lastPublishedAt",
-  "excerpt"
-]New value: +[
+  "id",
+  "title",
+  "kind",
+  "status",
+  "updatedAt",
+  "createdAt",
+  "publishedTo",
+  "publishedCount",
+  "lastPublishedAt",
+  "excerpt"
+]

First observedOct 1, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered by structured data. The description adds real value beyond that: newest-first ordering, exclusion of archived drafts, and that results are compact summaries stripped of full HTML — behavior an agent cannot get from the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose and ordering are correctly front-loaded and there is no filler. However, the kind explanation ('a draft saved as a Note, or one only ever scheduled as a Note with no article settings') is a long, nested clause about an output field that is only loosely relevant to the act of listing drafts.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present, the description need not document return values, and it still usefully characterizes result content (compact, no HTML) and ordering. Given read-only annotations and a fully described 3-parameter schema, the definition covers what an agent needs, with only the archived-status edge case left unresolved.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so limit, query, and status are already fully documented, making baseline 3 appropriate. The description adds no syntax or default detail for those parameters, and its claim that archived drafts are excluded sits uneasily with a status enum that accepts ARCHIVED, leaving the reader unsure how that combination behaves.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The first sentence gives a specific verb and resource ('List the authenticated user's drafts') plus scope ('authenticated user's') and ordering ('newest first'). It also disambiguates the note-vs-article distinction, though it never names list_notes or list_reader_reply_drafts as the obvious siblings an agent would need to choose between.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by the scope statement and by the note/article explanation, and it points at create_article_from_note as a downstream consumer of note drafts. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance against the many other list_* siblings, so the agent must infer selection.

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

All Narrareach tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?