List Gmail drafts for a user, optionally limiting results, so agents can review unsent messages before sending.
List the user's Gmail drafts
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| user_id | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| drafts | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description must convey behavioral traits. Only states 'list', missing details like pagination, ordering, or whether it returns full draft content. Insufficient for a tool with no annotations.
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?
Single sentence with no fluff. Every word adds value.
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?
With output schema existing, description doesn't detail return format. However, for a list tool with no annotations, more context about behavior (e.g., sorting, draft state) would improve completeness.
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 0% and description adds no meaning to parameters (limit, user_id). Does not explain default behavior, maximum impact, or how user_id is used.
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 uses specific verb 'List' and resource 'Gmail drafts' clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like gmail_list_inbox. The purpose is immediately clear.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like gmail_get_draft or gmail_list_inbox. Missing context about appropriate scenarios or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.