compose_draft

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full burden. It only says 'assemble... into a markdown draft' without disclosing side effects, storage location, or any behavioral traits. The description is too brief to inform the agent about consequences.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is concise but could benefit from additional structure to include parameter context without becoming verbose.

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 5 parameters and an output schema, the description lacks context about what the draft includes, how style works, or what the output is. Though the output schema exists, the description does not set expectations for the markdown draft's structure.

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 the description does not explain any parameter's meaning or purpose. It only mentions 'captured quotes,' ignoring cluster_slug, outline, quote_slugs, style, and include_bibliography. The agent would have no semantic help beyond the parameter names.

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 'Assemble captured quotes into a markdown draft,' using a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from siblings like compose_brief_draft by focusing on assembling quotes, but could be more explicit about what the draft contains.

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 others. Siblings like compose_brief_draft or capture_quote are not mentioned, and no when-not or alternative context is provided.

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