edit_draft

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

It discloses a useful behavioral trait: title and content 'will be re-sanitized locally.' However, with no annotations, it omits potential side effects such as setting visibility to 'published,' which the schema allows and which slightly conflicts with the 'before publishing' framing.

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 short sentences, with the main action front-loaded and no filler. The key behavioral note about re-sanitization is concisely included.

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 is adequate for a basic draft edit, but it doesn't mention the visibility parameter's ability to publish or any output/return behavior. Given no output schema and no annotations, an agent would only have partial context for less-common use cases.

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 parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond mentioning title and content, and doesn't discuss tags or visibility, but the schema already covers those.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Edit a draft post') and adds the timing constraint 'before publishing,' which helps distinguish it from update_post and publish_post. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the draft focus is clear.

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?

It gives clear context ('before publishing') but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like update_post or update_article. There are no exclusions or alternative routing hints.

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