List daily drafts

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description's burden is lower. It adds a useful scope word ('current' versions) but says nothing about result ordering, volume, or pagination behavior for what is implicitly a list endpoint.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with the resource first and the optional filters after; nothing is wasted. Its brevity is close to under-specification rather than over-verbosity, so it isn't penalized heavily here.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be described. But with 0% parameter description coverage and no annotations beyond readOnlyHint, the definition should still specify date/timezone formats or default listing scope for an agent to call it confidently.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden, and it does name all three filters (date, timezone, status) mapping to workDate, timezone, and status. It stops short of giving the expected format for workDate or timezone strings, so the agent must guess syntax despite knowing each filter's meaning.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (current daily draft versions), and the plural 'versions' implies a collection rather than a single record, which distinguishes it from the sibling get_daily_draft. No sibling is named explicitly, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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 phrase 'optionally filtered by' signals all filters are optional and that this is a browsing tool, which implies usage. However, it never says when to use this versus get_daily_draft for a single draft, nor any prerequisite such as needing a configured daily-draft source.

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