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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuine behavioral detail, that results are 'Returned in sort order,' but does not describe pagination behavior or result shape beyond what the schema states.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and the clarifying '(questions)' before the operational details. Efficient, with no filler, though the trailing 'Filter by template_id' sentence is largely redundant with the schema.

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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering safety, the description is nearly complete; only pagination defaults and return shape are unaddressed, and those are covered by the schema parameter descriptions.

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%, so page, per_page, and template_id are already fully documented in the schema. The description restates the template_id filter without adding format or edge-case meaning beyond it, so the baseline 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 and resource ('List the items (questions) within form templates') and clarifies that items are questions, which disambiguates from the sibling list_form_templates. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the scope is unambiguous.

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?

'Filter by template_id' implies the primary use case of narrowing to one template, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives guidance (e.g., when to use list_form_templates instead, or what happens if template_id is omitted). Usage is implied rather than stated.

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