send_draft

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action without disclosing side effects (e.g., whether the draft is deleted after sending), required permissions, reversibility, or return behavior. The 'immediately' adds slight context but insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 sentence with clear structure and no filler. It is appropriately concise, though it could include more actionable guidance without losing efficiency.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description is incomplete given no annotations, no output schema, and a 0% schema description coverage. It fails to mention side effects, prerequisites, or return values, and does not address overlapping sibling tools, making it insufficient for an agent to safely invoke the tool.

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 input schema has one parameter (draft_id) with no description (0% coverage), and the description does not explicitly explain the parameter. It only implies via 'existing draft' that draft_id identifies which draft to send, adding minimal semantic 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 the action ('Send') and the resource ('an existing draft'), with the adverb 'immediately' adding specificity. It distinguishes from siblings like send_message, reply_to_message, forward_message, and create_draft by targeting an already-created 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It implies usage with a draft_id but does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or compare with send_message or create_draft.

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