linkedin_list_drafts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds context about 'locally saved' and 'not yet published,' which is useful but minimal. No contradictions with 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?

The description is a single, focused sentence that is front-loaded with the verb 'List' and immediately clarifies the resource and scope. No wasted words or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple, with rich annotations and high schema coverage. The description conveys the core purpose clearly. It could optionally mention output format or link to save/publish operations, but for a straightforward list tool, this is sufficient.

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% for the single optional boolean parameter includePublished, which is fully described in the schema. The description does not add parameter details, but the schema already carries that burden, so a baseline score of 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 + resource combination: 'List' + 'locally saved post drafts' and adds the scope 'that have not yet been published.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like linkedin_get_posts (published posts) and linkedin_save_draft (saving/creation).

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 implies when to use the tool (when you need to see drafts) but does not explicitly state alternatives or exclusionary conditions. It doesn't mention related tools like linkedin_save_draft, linkedin_publish_draft, or linkedin_delete_draft, which could be relevant for the agent to choose the right operation.

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