enoch_draft_paper

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

Annotations provide limited safety hints (not readonly, not destructive, not idempotent). The description adds only that dry_run defaults to true, but does not explain what drafting entails (e.g., side effects, state changes, or what 'eligible' means). More behavioral context is needed.

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 very brief (two sentences), which is concise but at the cost of missing critical information. It could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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 presence of three parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It fails to explain what the tool returns, the effects of force, or the criteria for 'eligible paper'.

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 0% and the description adds no explanation for the three parameters. 'requested_by' is required but undefined; 'dry_run' and 'force' are named but their meanings and effects are not described.

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 ('Draft') and the specific resource ('the next eligible paper'). It provides a precise purpose that distinguishes it from siblings like rewrite_draft, though it does not explicitly contrast with similar tools.

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 only mentions the default for dry_run but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, when to set dry_run or force, or any prerequisites or context.

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