delete_draft

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

With no annotations, the description notes the operation is permanent and cannot be undone, and states the return format. However, it lacks details on side effects, authorization needs, or rate limits.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences plus an Args/Returns block. No fluff, immediately conveys the action and key information.

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 simple delete operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, effect, parameter, and return. It is nearly complete, though missing error handling or precondition details.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds 'Draft ID' for post_id, but provides no further context like where to find the ID or expected format. Minimal value beyond the schema.

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 it permanently deletes a draft, with a strong verb ('delete') and specific resource ('draft'). Among siblings like create_draft, get_draft, list_drafts, etc., it is uniquely identified.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like unschedule_draft or update_draft. The description does not mention prerequisites or scenarios where deletion is appropriate.

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