Close an open draft and release its memory; save unsaved changes first because they will be lost.
Close an open draft and release its memory. Unsaved changes are lost, so call jianying_save_draft first. Use this when a draft is finished or was created by mistake.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Open draft name |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.20.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does disclose the key destructive trait: "Unsaved changes are lost." It also states the memory-release effect and the required save-first safeguard, though it does not cover permissions, error cases, or idempotency.
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 front-loaded with the core action and effect, followed by a concise danger warning and usage condition. Every sentence contributes useful information without repetition.
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 one-parameter close operation with no output schema, the description covers the essential action, destructive consequence, prerequisite, and intended usage scenario. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.
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%, so the single "name" parameter is already documented as "Open draft name." The description only alludes to an "open draft" and adds no format or naming details beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 uses a specific verb and resource: "Close an open draft," and adds the side effect "release its memory." This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools such as jianying_open_draft, jianying_create_draft, and jianying_save_draft.
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?
It gives explicit usage conditions: "when a draft is finished or was created by mistake," and a clear prerequisite: "call jianying_save_draft first." It lacks a direct when-not or alternative-tool comparison, but the context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.