which_form_do_i_needDescribe a jobsite or paperwork situation in plain language (e.g. 'starting an $80k renovation in Ontario', 'GC is not paying my invoice', 'crew doing welding tomorrow') and get the forms that fit, with citations and free print links. Guidance only — not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| situation | Yes | The situation, in plain language |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the input style, the output (matching forms with citations and free print links), and the 'guidance only, not legal advice' caveat. It doesn't cover edge cases like no matching forms, but for a simple one-parameter tool this is reasonably transparent.
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 well-structured sentence with illustrative examples and a disclaimer. Every part earns its place with no redundancy or 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?
Given the low complexity, single parameter, and no output schema, the description is complete: it covers input, output, and important caveats. The agent knows how to invoke it and what to expect.
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?
The schema covers the sole 'situation' parameter at 100%, and the description enriches it with concrete examples and explicit 'plain language' instruction. This adds clear semantic meaning beyond the schema's minimal 'The situation, in plain language'.
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 what the tool does: users describe a jobsite or paperwork situation in plain language and receive forms that fit. The concrete examples and mention of citations/free print links distinguish it from sibling tools like get_form or search_forms, which are more direct retrieval/search operations.
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 frames when to use the tool: when you have a situation in plain language and need form guidance. It provides clear context but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full exclusion guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have distinct purposes: form searching/recommending vs. tax calculations vs. pass purchase. The two form-finding tools (search_forms, which_form_do_i_need) overlap somewhat, but their descriptions clarify keyword search vs. plain-language recommendation.
Naming is mixed: some verb_noun (get_form, list_categories, search_forms), some noun phrases (hst_quick_method, required_hourly_rate), and one sentence-style name (which_form_do_i_need). No consistent pattern across the set.
8 tools is well within the ideal 3-15 range and each tool covers a meaningful aspect of the domain: form search, detail retrieval, categorization, recommendation, and tax/hourly-rate utilities.
The tool surface covers the full workflow: discover categories, search forms, get details, get recommendations, plus financial planning tools (tax, HST, hourly rate). No obvious gaps for a forms-and-estimates server.