draft_list_placements

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only repeats the name, without explaining pagination, ordering, return structure, or that it is a read-only operation. This is minimal and lacks meaningful behavioral context.

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 succinct sentence that wastes no words and immediately states the core function. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple list operation.

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 the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is too sparse to be contextually complete. It does not explain the draft scope, distinguish from similar sibling tools, or describe the return value and pagination behavior, leaving the agent under-informed.

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% because both limit and offset have descriptions. The description adds no additional parameter detail, which is acceptable as the schema already documents them fully. Baseline score of 3 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 clearly states the tool lists all draft placements with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling list operations like list_placements or vast_list_placements, leaving the 'draft' scope as the only implicit differentiator.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus the many sibling placement listing tools, nor does it offer any exclusions or context for choosing it.

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