view_lp_draft

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the previewUrl behavior and detail-level contents, but does not explicitly state read-only status or potential side effects. The name 'view' suggests a safe read operation, but that's inferred rather than stated.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with purpose, then compactly conveys the detail level behaviors. No wasted words.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description covers key return fields per detail level and mentions the preview URL form. It could be more structured but is sufficient for a simple view operation.

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 already documents both parameters with 100% coverage. The description enriches the 'detail' parameter with tool-specific meanings (what each level returns), adding value beyond the schema's generic verbosity explanation.

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States exactly what it does: 'View the unpublished draft of a landing page.' Specific verb+resource+scope, clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like view_landing_page or view_lp_version that target published or versioned content.

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?

Gives clear context (draft vs published) but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria. The name and description imply use for drafts, but an agent might need to infer the difference from sibling tool names.

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