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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes this as a safe read. Because there is no output schema, the description's disclosure of the returned fields (submission counts, live URL, folder) is genuinely additive and tells the agent what to expect back, though it says nothing about pagination limits or rate behavior beyond what the schema implies.

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 compact sentences with the core purpose and the filtering/sorting capability front-loaded; little waste. The trailing 'Formstack: GET /forms' is a minor endpoint reference that adds little for an agent but costs almost nothing.

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 six-parameter, all-optional list tool, the description covers scope, filters, sort, and returned fields, and the schema handles parameter detail. The absence of an output schema is partially offset by the field enumeration, leaving only pagination behavior and result-count expectations unstated.

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 six filters (search, folder, order, order_by, page_size, page_number) are already fully documented with defaults and ranges. The description's mention of filtering by name/folder and sorting maps to those parameters but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so 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 forms in the account') and even enumerates the returned fields (submission counts, live URL, folder), so the agent knows exactly what the tool yields. It does not explicitly contrast itself with singular siblings like formstack_get_form, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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 notes that results can be filtered by name or folder and sorted, which implies when the tool is useful, but it never states when to prefer it over alternatives such as formstack_get_form for a single form or formstack_list_folders for folder enumeration. Usage is implied rather than specified.

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