Pipepost

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'FREE' which hints at no cost, but doesn't disclose other behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens if no drafts exist. For a list operation with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and includes relevant details (attributes and 'FREE' note) without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given one parameter with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description adequately covers the basic purpose. However, for a list tool with no annotations, it should ideally mention expected output format or behavioral constraints to be more 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% with one parameter documented. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it doesn't explain the 'status' enum values or default behavior). Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('all saved drafts') with specific attributes included (status, platforms, dates). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_draft' (single) and 'list_posts' (published content). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'content_audit' or 'status' tools that might overlap.

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 like 'list_posts' (for published content) or 'get_draft' (for a single draft). The mention 'FREE' might imply a cost context but doesn't clarify usage scenarios or prerequisites.

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