save_draft

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses authentication needs, which is useful behavioral context. However, it doesn't cover other traits like whether the operation is idempotent, what happens on failure, or if it overwrites existing drafts, leaving gaps 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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('Save the current draft') and adds essential context ('to Firebase (requires authentication)'). Every word earns its place with no redundancy or 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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimal but covers key aspects: purpose and authentication. However, it lacks details on behavioral outcomes (e.g., success/failure responses, side effects) and doesn't fully compensate for the absence of structured data, making it adequate but incomplete.

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to add parameter details, and it appropriately doesn't mention any parameters, focusing on the tool's purpose and constraints instead.

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 ('Save') and the target ('the current draft'), specifying the destination ('to Firebase'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'save_local_draft' by mentioning Firebase, but doesn't explicitly contrast with all siblings (e.g., 'publish_level').

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 usage when saving a draft to Firebase, with a prerequisite ('requires authentication'), but doesn't specify when to use this versus alternatives like 'save_local_draft' or 'publish_level'. No explicit when-not scenarios or detailed alternatives are provided.

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