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

With annotations already covering mutation safety, idempotency, and open-world scope, the description adds useful behavioral detail: publishing makes current form content visible until the next publish, and unpublishing hides the embed. It does not cover permissions or failure behavior, but the core state effect is clear.

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?

Three tight sentences front-load the action and outcome, pair the boolean branches symmetrically, and end with the required argument. Every sentence carries weight with no filler.

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 simple two-parameter mutation tool with annotations and no output schema, the description explains the state change and visitor-visible effect well enough for correct invocation. Minor missing elements such as permission requirements or error behavior are not critical here.

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 50% because form is documented while published lacks a schema description, so the description compensates by defining the semantics of both true and false for the published flag. It also repeats the accepted form identifier, though it adds no format detail beyond id or slug.

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 and resource (publish/unpublish a form) and explains the visitor-facing effect, clearly distinguishing it from generic form siblings like create_a_form, update_form, and delete_a_form. An agent can identify it as the visibility-state tool without opening the 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 description explains what published: true and published: false do, but it does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over update_form or other form siblings, nor does it list prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is inferable from the operation, but no alternative routing is provided.

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