Create draft post

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the critical non-publishing behavior and local saving, which is essential for an agent to avoid expecting immediate publication. It does not cover auth or return values, but for a simple create operation this is sufficient at a high level.

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?

Two sentences, zero wasted words. The main action is front-loaded, and the critical caveat about publishing is clearly stated. Structure is ideal.

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 two-parameter creation tool, the description covers the essential context: what it does, the channel constraint, and the lifecycle (not published until approved and published). It lacks return-value expectations or error handling, but given no output schema and low complexity, this is a minor gap.

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 already covers both parameters with descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no new parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema provides, 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 clearly states the action—'Create a draft social post'—with a specific resource (draft post) and a channel constraint. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like publish_draft and approve_draft by explicitly noting the draft is not published until approved and explicitly published.

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 the workflow of creating a draft before approval and publication, giving context on when this tool is appropriate. It does not explicitly mention alternatives like update_draft, but the 'NOT published' disclaimer clearly separates its role from publish actions.

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