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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond the annotations: it discloses that existing answers are destroyed along with the form, and it names the required auth scope (form_responses:write). That is more than the annotations provide.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the destructive action and its cascade, followed by the usage trigger and auth requirement. 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?

Covers action, cascade effect, usage trigger, and auth scope for a single-parameter delete; with no output schema, no return-value explanation is needed. Missing only an explicit statement about reversibility or when deletion is inappropriate, which would round it out.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single 'id' parameter is fully documented there, including the hint to resolve it via list_form_responses. The description adds no further parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 (Remove/delete) and resource (a form attached to a record), plus the cascade detail that answers are deleted too. An agent can distinguish this from get_form_response, list_form_responses, and the form_template siblings 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?

Explicitly gives the when-to-use condition: 'Use this before attaching a different form, since a record holds at most one form.' That is a clear contextual trigger with rationale, though it doesn't state a when-not-to-use case or name a specific alternative tool.

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