Create an immutable local draft version

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

Annotations already provide basic safety signals (readOnly=false, idempotent=false, destructive=false). The description adds valuable context about the 'immutable ledger' and the lack of Substack interaction, which goes beyond the annotations and clarifies the tool's side effects.

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, focused sentences that front-load the action and key constraint. Every word earns its place; no fluff or redundancies.

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 captures the essential purpose and the key constraint (local, immutable), but with 5 parameters and no output schema, it omits details about parameter usage, required fields, and return behavior. It is adequate but leaves gaps that the schema partially fills.

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 0%, and the description provides no information about parameters such as title, markdown, subject, etc. The schema names give minimal hints, but the description fails to compensate for the low coverage, leaving the agent to infer parameter meanings from schema names alone.

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 states a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('local Markdown content in the immutable ledger'), and the second sentence clearly distinguishes it from publishing tools by stating it never contacts or publishes to Substack. This differentiates it from siblings like update_local_draft and sync_publication.

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 exclusions ('never contacts or publishes to Substack') and implies it is for local-only draft creation. It does not name specific alternatives, but the context is sufficient to infer when to use this tool over publishing or updating tools.

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