get_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 states that the tool returns 'detailed information' including specified components, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, permission requirements, or error behaviors, but for a 'get' operation, this is minimally adequate.

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 sentences: the first delivers the core purpose and contents, the second provides a necessary usage hint. No redundant words; every sentence earns its place.

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 absence of an output schema, the description adequately outlines what is returned (latest revision, edit history, resolved config). It matches the complexity of the tool; no obvious gaps considering the sibling context and schema richness.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for all parameters. The description adds value by telling users to use 'list_drafts' to find the draft_id, but does not enhance parameter meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'detailed information about a specific draft', listing specific contents (latest revision, edit history, resolved config). It distinguishes from sibling 'list_drafts' by implying this tool retrieves full details of a single draft, not a list.

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 explicitly advises to 'Use list_drafts first to find draft IDs', providing a clear prerequisite. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the usage context is clearly defined for retrieving draft details.

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