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

The description adds valuable non-obvious behavior beyond the annotations: setting include_image_url=true can trigger a cold render that calls the image model and takes 60-90 seconds. The readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations only cover safety, not latency or model invocation, so this is genuine added context with 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 two focused sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the conditional behavior and critical warning are packed efficiently into the second sentence.

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 single-object read tool, the description covers the essential behavior and the trickiest caveat (image render latency). There is no output schema, so 'full detail' gives a general sense of the return payload but not an explicit shape. The required context parameter is well handled by the schema, so this is reasonably complete.

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?

The schema already documents draft_id, handle, context, and include_image_url. The description enriches include_image_url by explaining the render/cached-render distinction and the cold-start latency, which is not in the schema. With 75% schema coverage, this pushes parameter semantics above the baseline.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch one draft in full detail.' It immediately distinguishes this from list_drafts (plural listing) and update_draft/publish_draft. The optional image-render behavior is also clearly tied to the tool's purpose.

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?

It establishes a clear context: use when a single draft's full detail is needed, optionally with the rendered story image. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives such as list_drafts or download_draft_image, or state when not to use this tool, so it stops short of the highest bar.

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