create_draft

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

Annotations already declare this a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent mutation; the description adds the key behavioral fact that the draft stays inert until schedule_draft runs, which is exactly the lifecycle context an agent needs. It omits that repeat calls create duplicate drafts (relevant given idempotentHint=false), so not a 5.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the most important constraint (not posted until scheduled) placed early. Nothing wastes space.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description would ideally say what comes back (presumably a draft id needed for schedule_draft) and confirm that content is the minimum required to create one. For a 19-param create tool that omits any mention of its return value, the definition is adequate but incomplete.

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%, so all 19 parameters including the nested 'options' object and platform-specific fields are already documented in the schema. The description mentions no parameter at all, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource ('Save a post as a draft') and immediately draws the boundary against the sibling that actually publishes it, schedule_draft. An agent can tell what this does and what it does not do without opening the schema.

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 a clear use condition ('without choosing an account or a time yet', 'a plan a human will finish') and names the follow-up tool schedule_draft. It stops short of an explicit when-not-to-use rule (e.g. 'if you already have an account and time, use schedule_post'), so 4 rather than 5.

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