List Drafts

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

No annotations present, so description must bear full burden. It implies read-only behavior ('see drafts', 'review') but does not explicitly disclose traits like idempotency, auth requirements, or pagination behavior beyond a cursor parameter.

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 efficient sentences: first states purpose, second adds usage context. No redundant text.

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?

Missing critical information: sort order of drafts, whether full content is returned, and if there are any rate limits or prerequisites. For a tool with no output schema, description should clarify return format.

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 100%, and the description repeats the same parameter descriptions as the schema (e.g., 'The conversation ID to get drafts from'). Adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

Description clearly states 'Lists drafts in a conversation' with specific verb and resource. Adds usage context 'to see drafts before sending or to review unsent messages', distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_draft or delete_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?

Provides clear context for when to use ('to see drafts before sending or to review unsent messages'). However, does not explicitly mention when not to use or suggest alternatives among siblings.

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