send_to_drafts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: drafts are for mobile finishing, Instagram is not supported and will error, and folder paths trigger carousel drafts. It does not cover auth requirements or reversibility, but the core side effects are clearly stated.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action and purpose, then adds platform-specific caveats and carousel behavior. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy or fluff.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, use case, platform limitations, and folder handling. Given the absence of an output schema, return value details are not required. It does not mention auth preconditions, but for a drafts-sending tool, the provided information is largely sufficient.

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%, so the input schema already explains all parameters in detail, including paths behavior and caption caveats. The description adds some extra context (e.g., folder → carousel, Instagram error) but largely repeats what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 action: 'Upload local file(s) and send to the platform's drafts', with specific destination details (TikTok inbox / YouTube as private). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like publish_now and schedule_post by focusing on drafts for later mobile finishing.

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 explicit context for when to use this tool: 'useful when they want to add licensed music or polish before publishing'. It also gives a clear when-not via the Instagram limitation, noting that Instagram returns an error. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools for immediate publishing, so it falls just short of a perfect score.

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