draft_post

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it does disclose two important behaviors: content is sanitized locally and nothing is sent to the network. It also says the return is a preview. It doesn't specify what sanitization strips or whether the draft is persisted, but for a local preview helper this is above-average disclosure.

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 sentences with no filler; the verb and resource appear first, followed by the two most decision-relevant behaviors (local cleaning and preview). Appropriate size for this tool.

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 description covers overall purpose, local behavior, and a return preview, which is serviceable. However, with no output schema or annotations, it leaves open how the preview is represented, whether the draft is saved, and how visibility/publishing flow relates to publish_post. That is a meaningful gap for a 4-parameter tool.

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%, so the schema already explains title, content, tags, and visibility, giving the baseline. The description's 'cleaned locally' aligns with the content parameter but adds no syntax or value 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?

Uses a specific verb-object pair ('Create ... draft of a dev progress post') and adds the distinctive 'sanitized' qualifier. It clearly positions itself as the pre-publication preview step, not publish or edit, and separates it from siblings such as edit_draft and publish_post.

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 'before publishing' phrase and 'Returns a preview' give clear context: use this tool when you need a reviewed, sanitized draft before publishing. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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