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 real value beyond that by disclosing the payload scope (full question set, settings, public URL) and the read-before-write workflow, but says nothing about permissions, error behavior, or whether a missing id fails or returns empty.

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, each earning its place: what it returns, the workflow reason to call it, and the sibling alternative. The core purpose is front-loaded and there is 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 one-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, complete annotations, and an output schema, the description needn't explain return values, yet it still summarizes them. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 form_id parameter already documents both accepted origins (id from create_form/list_forms or slug from a share link). The description only repeats 'this needs an id', which adds nothing beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Get one form in full') and enumerates exactly what comes back: every question with type, options, validation, plus settings and public URL. It explicitly distinguishes itself from list_forms, so an agent can separate it from its closest sibling without opening either 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?

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance ('Call this before update_form so you edit against what the form actually contains rather than what you remember') and names the alternative for listing ('For a list of forms call list_forms'). It also states the precondition that an id is required.

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