capcut_list_drafts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly indicates a read-only listing operation, specifies the source directory, and names two result attributes. It does not explicitly state return format or sorting/scope details, but the behavior is unambiguous for a zero-parameter list tool.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler. It packs the action, resource, exact path, and key output fields efficiently.

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 simple tool needs no parameters, but with no output schema the description should more explicitly state what the returned draft entries contain (e.g., draft identifiers/names) rather than only duration and lock status. The sentence is a good start but leaves the full return contract implied.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description need not add parameter meaning. The schema covers the empty parameter set, and the description provides no conflicting information.

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'), resource ('CapCut drafts'), exact location, and output fields ('duration and lock status'). This distinguishes it from sibling list tools focused on effects, transitions, filters, and stickers.

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 intended use is implied by the name and description: call it to enumerate available CapCut drafts before choosing one to edit. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer it over read_timeline or other sibling tools, and no exclusions are stated.

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