save_draft

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states the tool is machine-local and never transmitted, and lists common errors with types. It also specifies the return structure. However, it does not mention authentication or rate limits, though not critical for a local tool.

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?

Description is concise at 5 sentences, each providing distinct value: purpose, free cost, usage context, return structure, and common errors. No redundant information.

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 no output schema, the description includes return structure and common errors. It references sibling tools for later publishing. All 5 parameters are documented in the schema, and the description adds meaningful context, making it complete for agent use.

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 100% with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds value by explaining the context of platforms as targeting later publishing, and notes the tool is free. This goes beyond repeating schema information.

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?

Description clearly states the tool saves markdown content as a local draft in a specific path, distinguishing it from sibling tools like publish and cross_publish. The verb 'save' and resource 'local draft' are explicit.

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?

Description indicates when to use the tool (save locally for later publishing) and mentions alternatives (publish, cross_publish). It lacks explicit 'when not to use' but provides sufficient context.

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