List Hashnode drafts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds useful behavioral details such as pagination via 'after', response formats, and the returned field list, going beyond what annotations provide without contradicting them.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured: a short intro, bulleted arguments, and a return specification. Every sentence carries useful information with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

For a read-only list operation, the description covers the required argument, optional pagination, and return fields. It does not provide an example or detail error scenarios, but for a low-risk read-only tool with annotations, the level of detail is adequate.

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 the baseline is 3. The description repeats parameter details already present in the schema (e.g., default limit, pagination cursor) and adds minimal new semantics like 'from hashnode_get_me' and 'max 50', which are already in the schema properties.

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 clearly states 'List drafts in a Hashnode publication' with a specific verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like hashnode_list_posts and hashnode_publish_draft, leaving no ambiguity about its function.

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 context that publication_id comes from hashnode_get_me, suggesting a workflow. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this over hashnode_list_posts or other alternatives, so guidance is implied rather than stated directly.

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