List draft posts

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does indicate a read-only listing operation and adds the context of 'locally stored', but it does not disclose return format, auth requirements, or rate limits. It does not contradict anything, but there are gaps.

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, efficient sentence with no redundancy. Every word contributes meaning, making it appropriately concise and well-structured.

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?

The tool has a single optional parameter and no output schema. The description sufficiently explains what the tool does and the filtering option, but it does not mention the return format or any side effects, which might be expected given the lack of an output schema. For a simple list tool, this is acceptable but not fully 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 input schema's status parameter has a description that fully explains its purpose, and the overall schema coverage is 100%. The description merely repeats this with 'optionally filtered by status', adding no new semantic value beyond the schema.

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 uses the verb 'List' and specifies the resource 'locally stored drafts', which clearly indicates the operation's scope. It is distinct from sibling list tools like list_dm_drafts and list_retweet_drafts, though not explicitly named. The addition of 'locally stored' adds context, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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 tool is for retrieving drafts and optionally filtering by status, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over other list tools or any exclusions. There is no mention of alternative tools or conditions for use, so it only provides implied usage.

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