list_drafts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that this routes 'through the web editor API,' implying a web-session context, which is mildly useful but thin. No further behavioral detail (ordering, volume, freshness) is disclosed.

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?

A single tight sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded and zero filler. It is efficient, though it may be slightly under-specified rather than optimally concise.

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?

An output schema exists, so return shape need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. Still, for a paginated list tool the description says nothing about result ordering, whether empty results are possible, or how drafts differ from list_posts, leaving the minimum viable level.

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% with 3 parameters, including the cursor/page_size pagination contract and the campaign_id fallback to the web session. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('unpublished drafts for a campaign'), which is more precise than a generic list. However, it never distinguishes itself from the closely related sibling list_posts, leaving the agent to infer that drafts are a distinct, unpublished subset. Clear but lacks sibling differentiation.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and does not name an alternative such as list_posts for published content. The phrase 'through the web editor API' hints at a context but does not tell the agent when this tool is the correct choice over its many list/get siblings.

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