capcut_list_drafts

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, and the mention of 'duration and lock status' clarifies the return information. The specific path also removes ambiguity about the data source, though it does not explicitly state that no modifications occur or discuss side effects.

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 a single sentence of about 15 words, starting with the verb 'List' and immediately naming the resource. It avoids unnecessary details, making it concise and well-structured.

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 simple zero-parameter list tool without an output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: action, location, and output fields. It does not explicitly state that returned draft identifiers can be used with sibling tools like capcut_read_timeline, but this is implied. The description is largely complete, with minor room for contextual linkage.

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 input schema has no parameters, so the description is not required to explain parameter syntax. The description instead provides the fixed location of the drafts, which is useful context beyond the empty schema. Baseline 4 is appropriate for zero-parameter tools.

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 explicitly states the tool 'List CapCut drafts' with a specific path and identifies the output fields (duration and lock status). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like capcut_read_timeline or capcut_clone_draft, which operate on individual drafts rather than listing them.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that listing drafts is a prerequisite for selecting a draft to operate on with sibling tools, nor does it indicate any exclusions or special conditions.

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