Web Data Forms

wdf_data_templates_submissions_get

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns the complete contents and metadata of a specific submission. Use this tool when you already know the Submission Number and need to view or verify its data. If you don't already have the Submission Number, you may obtain it via wdf_data_templates_submissions_search or wdf_data_templates_submissions_list_recent.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`dataTemplateId`	Yes	The Data Template ID.
`submissionNumber`	Yes	The Submission Number.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns 'complete contents and metadata' and is for viewing/verifying, which provides useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. However, it does not describe error behavior or response format in detail.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and every sentence adds value. It is concise and well-structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool is a simple read operation with two well-specified parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficient. It covers purpose, usage context, and alternative tools, and clarifies the return is complete contents and metadata.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema descriptions cover 100% of parameters (dataTemplateId and submissionNumber), but they are minimal (just repeating the names). The tool description does not add meaning beyond the schema, though it indirectly guides on how to obtain the submission number via other tools. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool returns the complete contents and metadata of a specific submission, using the specific verb 'returns' and resource 'submission'. It also distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying it is for when you already know the Submission Number.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to use this tool ('when you already know the Submission Number and need to view or verify its data') and provides alternatives for obtaining the number via wdf_data_templates_submissions_search or wdf_data_templates_submissions_list_recent. This is clear usage guidance.

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

All Web Data Forms tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a unique, clearly defined purpose: listing templates, fetching schema, and performing distinct submission operations (create, get, list recent, search, update, workflow update). Even overlapping actions like list_recent and search are differentiated by whether criteria are used, and get is by submission number. The workflow-specific tools are also distinct from the data-field tools.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent wdf_data_templates_ prefix, with template-level actions using verb phrases (list, get_schema_and_sample_submissions) and submission-level actions using submissions_<verb>. The pattern is uniform, and the verb-first structure (create, get, update, search, list_recent) makes it predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Nine tools is within the ideal range for a focused domain. The count covers the full workflow of form management—schema discovery, submission CRUD (minus delete), searching, listing, and workflow state changes—without unnecessary redundancy. Each tool corresponds to a distinct operation needed to work with web data forms.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the core lifecycle: list templates, get schema, create/read/update submissions, search/list, and manage workflow state. The only notable gap is the lack of a delete operation for submissions, which may be intentionally omitted for audit purposes. Workflow metadata retrieval and sample submissions provide good supporting context, so agents can operate effectively.

Resources

Need Help?