clear_page_draft

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds real value beyond them by delimiting blast radius — it discloses what is NOT destroyed (the backend page derived from the draft), which the annotations cannot express. It still says nothing about irreversibility or whether confirmation is required before clearing.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and the parenthetical is genuinely load-bearing rather than filler. Nothing could be cut without losing routing 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 one-parameter destructive cleanup tool with annotations covering the safety profile, the description covers the essential gap (scope vs. backend pages). It stops short of noting that the action is irreversible or how to discover the draft_id, which would make it fully self-sufficient.

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?

One parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents draft_id (albeit thinly, as "Draft id"). The description adds no syntax, format, or provenance guidance such as obtaining the id from list_page_drafts; baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the load.

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?

States a specific verb ("Delete") and a precise resource ("a local page draft"), and the parenthetical scopes it against the backend page objects that sibling tools like delete_page and commit_page_draft operate on. An agent can tell this apart from delete_page and commit_page_draft without opening any schema.

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 parenthetical implies the appropriate context (discarding a local draft that has not been, or should not be, published), but no tool is named as an alternative and no explicit when-to-use / when-not-to-use rule is given. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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