draft_proposal

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It discloses that it uses saved winning proposals as references and mentions rate limits (free plan: 5 drafts/month). However, it doesn't specify if the proposal is automatically saved or how output is delivered.

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 sentences, no fluff. First sentence states purpose, second adds context, third mentions limits. Efficient and front-loaded.

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?

No output schema, but description says 'Returns a ready-to-send proposal', which is sufficient for an agent to understand the result. Lacks details on output format or how to access the proposal, but overall context is adequate given the simple parameters.

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 parameters are already well-documented. Description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it mentions 'brief' but doesn't elaborate on budget, deadline, your_rate.

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 the tool drafts a proposal from a brief using saved winning proposals as style references, distinguishing it from siblings like analyze_brief (analysis only) and budget_proposal (budget-specific).

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?

Description implies when to use (when you have a brief and want a proposal) and mentions style references, but lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives like 'use analyze_brief if you only need analysis'.

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