unschedule_draft

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It states the tool cancels a scheduled publish and keeps the post as a draft, but does not disclose potential side effects, required permissions, or whether the post must be in scheduled state. The return value is minimal.

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 brief with only two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose. Every word carries meaning, though it could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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?

Given the low complexity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the basic action and argument. However, it lacks behavioral details that would complete the context for an agent, such as whether the tool can be called on non-scheduled posts or if it's idempotent.

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%, yet the description only reiterates 'Draft ID', adding little beyond the parameter name. No format, constraints, or additional context is given for the post_id parameter.

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 the action: cancel a scheduled publish, keeping the post as a draft. The verb 'cancel' and resource 'scheduled publish' are specific and contrast with sibling tools like schedule_draft and publish_draft.

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 implies when to use (when a post is scheduled and you want to unschedule it) but provides no explicit guidance on prerequisites, when not to use, or alternatives. The context of sibling tools helps but the description itself lacks directive.

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