discard_output_schema_draft

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses main behavior and a failure condition. Missing details on side effects (e.g., permission requirements, what happens if no draft). Adequate for a simple undo 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and outcome, followed by a critical condition. No wasted words.

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?

Tool is simple (1 param, no output schema). Description covers essential behavior and failure case. Doesn't explain what an output_schema is, but that's domain knowledge. Among many similar discard tools in siblings, this is 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?

Only one parameter (id) with a schema description. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3 applies.

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: discard uncommitted draft edits on an output_schema, resetting to last published state. It distinguishes from sibling discard tools by specifying the resource 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?

Clearly states when to use (when there are uncommitted drafts) and a specific condition (fails if never published). Implicitly excludes use when no draft exists or when wanting to save the draft. Does not explicitly compare with alternatives like update_output_schema or request_publish_output_schema.

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