Read a listing draft

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it is a safe read. The description adds what the tool returns (detailed fields, history, etc.) but does not disclose edge cases, like behavior for nonexistent drafts or permission requirements. It is consistent with annotations and adds moderate value beyond 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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Returns a stored draft in full') and then enumerates the return content. While the list is somewhat long, it is still concise and free of 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?

Given there is no output schema, this description does an adequate job of explaining what the tool returns, covering all key aspects: fields, photos, comparables, price statistics, validation result, and history. It is complete enough for a read-only retrieval tool, though it could mention error conditions or prerequisites.

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?

The single parameter draftId is fully described in the schema ('Draft id returned by prepare_listing'). The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, so with 100% schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool returns a stored draft in full, listing its contents (fields, photos, comparables, price statistics, validation result, history). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_drafts (which lists all drafts) and update/delete drafts, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It is implied from the name and sibling tools that this is the 'get one draft' tool, but the description offers no usage context or exclusions, such as 'use list_drafts to see all drafts'.

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