linkedin_save_draft

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

The description goes beyond annotations by revealing that LinkedIn has no draft API, so drafts are stored locally and are not visible in the LinkedIn UI. This is critical behavioral context that helps the agent understand what 'save draft' actually does.

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?

Three sentences deliver purpose, storage location, and usage guidance without redundancy. Every word earns its place.

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 save-draft operation with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description adequately covers behavior, constraints, and use case. It also notes the local-store nuance, making it 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?

The schema covers all three parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already handles parameter semantics effectively.

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 'save' and the resource 'post text as a local draft', and explicitly notes 'without publishing it', distinguishing it from publishing tools like linkedin_create_post and linkedin_publish_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?

The description provides clear usage context: 'Use this to prepare content for review before publishing.' It implies when this tool is appropriate and contrasts with publishing, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or spell out when not to use it.

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