update_draft

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

No annotations provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses the partial update behavior ('Only provided fields are updated — omitted fields retain their current values') and follow-up actions. However, it lacks details on permissions, side effects, or implications of syncing, which are relevant for a mutation 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?

Three sentences: purpose, behavior, and next steps. No redundant information. Efficiently structured for an AI agent to quickly understand and use.

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 tool has 12 parameters and no output schema, the description covers core usage and follow-up actions. It does not elaborate on typical use cases or constraints not already in the schema, but the schema is comprehensive, making the description sufficiently complete.

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 92%, so the schema already documents most parameters well. The description adds only a generic reference ('recipients, subject, body, or other fields') without providing additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 ('update'), resource ('locally saved draft'), and specific fields ('recipients, subject, body, or other fields'). It also differentiates from sibling tools like create_draft and send_draft by focusing on editing an existing draft.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use to edit a draft before sending' and provides follow-up actions: 'call send_draft to send or sync_draft_to_remote to push to Proton Drafts.' Does not explicitly exclude other uses but the context is clear.

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