draft_create_placement

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action, omitting any details about permissions, side effects, validation, or return values for this mutation tool.

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, direct sentence with no wasted words, making it concise and front-loaded. It is slightly over-terse for the information needed, but structurally adequate.

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?

Given a nested object parameter and no output schema, the description does not explain what fields the draft object should contain, any prerequisites (e.g., existing campaign draft), or what the tool returns. This is a significant gap for an agent to use it correctly.

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% as both parameters (campaign_draft_id and draft) have descriptions. The description adds no further parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score applies.

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 is specific and clear: 'Create a new draft placement' names the verb (create) and the resource (draft placement), making it easily distinguishable from siblings like draft_update_placement or draft_list_placements.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_placement or draft_update_placement. There is no mention of workflow, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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