skylight_list_auto_creation_drafts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It only states it lists events, giving no information about safety (read-only), authentication, pagination, or side effects. This is insufficient for a listing operation.

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 with zero fluff. Every word adds value: action, resource, context, and alternative. Perfectly sized for quick comprehension.

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 no output schema and zero parameter documentation, the description is incomplete. It does not hint at return format or parameter meaning, which are essential for correct use. The tool's context (AI intents) is barely explained.

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 0%, and the description provides no explanation of the parameters (id, frameId). The agent has no clue what these parameters represent, which is critical for correct invocation.

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 tool lists events drafted by an AI intent for review, and explicitly distinguishes it from a sibling tool for meal/activity engines. The verb 'list' and resource 'events an AI intent drafted' are specific and unambiguous.

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 provides clear guidance on when to use this tool (to review drafts before approving) and when not to (for meal/activity engines, use skylight_list_auto_creation_items instead). This explicitly differentiates from a sibling tool.

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