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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds the upstream endpoint (GET /management/responses), which is modest extra context. It omits pagination behavior and expected page-size coupling that a 9-param list tool would benefit from.

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 front-loaded sentences with the primary purpose first and the filter scope second. 'The answers people gave' is arguably filler, but it aids disambiguation at minimal cost.

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?

With full schema coverage, a readOnly annotation, and no output schema to explain, the description covers what an agent needs to call it. Return shape and pagination defaults are the only unaddressed items, both minor for a read tool.

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 all nine parameters are already documented with types, enums and ranges. The description reinforces survey/contact/date-window filtering but adds no syntax or semantics beyond the schema; 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 ('List') and resource ('survey responses') and immediately scopes it ('optionally narrowed to one survey, one contact or a date window'). The phrase 'This is the main read: the answers people gave' implicitly separates it from the singular formbricks_get_response sibling.

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 clear usage context ('main read' for the answers) and enumerates the three narrowing dimensions, so the agent knows when this bulk-read applies. It never explicitly names get_response or delete_response as alternatives, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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