viruagent_save_draft

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that image placeholder replacement is identical to publish, which is useful behavioral info. However, it omits other important behaviors like whether drafts can be overwritten, required permissions, or output format.

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?

The description is extremely concise with two short sentences. No unnecessary words, every sentence provides relevant information. It is front-loaded with the core action.

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 11 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the purpose of many parameters, how to use image URLs, the effect of enforceSystemPrompt, or what happens on success/failure. Significant gaps remain.

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 very high (91%), so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only reiterating title/content and the image replacement behavior. It does not explain how parameters like imageUrls interact with autoUploadImages or relatedImageKeywords.

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 saves a draft with title and content, and distinguishes it from 'publish' by explicitly mentioning that image placeholder replacement is performed the same as publish. The verb and resource are specific and not a tautology.

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 context by comparing behavior with the sibling 'publish' tool, implying that this tool is for saving drafts rather than publishing. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or direct mention of alternatives.

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