내 초안 목록

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

Annotations already declare readOnly and non-destructive. The description adds that this tool returns draft IDs for later editing and implicitly that it shows only the user's own drafts (reinforced by the username schema description). No contradiction.

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 deliver purpose and usage, no redundant content.

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?

With annotations covering safety and schema covering parameters, the description provides a solid, complete context for a simple listing tool. It could mention the return format but the purpose implies it.

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 covers username semantically; limit is constrained but lacks description. The tool description does not explain parameters directly, but the schema's structural constraints and the username description provide adequate meaning for this simple tool.

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 explicitly states '내 임시저장 글 목록' (my temporary saved posts list) and explains that IDs are checked here before editing, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_posts.

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 provides a clear when-to-use: '초안을 이어 쓰거나 수정하기 전에 id를 여기서 확인한다' - before continuing or editing a draft. No explicit alternatives are named, but the context is clear.

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