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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe read-only nature is covered. The description adds value by describing what the actions represent (default processing, custom message, redirect URL, conditional logic), but omits operational behavior such as authentication, pagination, or response format.

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: the first front-loads the purpose and enumerates the action types; the second gives the REST endpoint. Every element contributes, with 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 simple read-only list tool with one required parameter, the description provides sufficient context about what is returned and how it is scoped. Annotations and schema cover safety and parameter meaning, so nothing critical 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 coverage is 100% for the single form_id parameter, and the schema already documents it as 'The form ID.' The description's endpoint path reinforces the same parameter but adds no new semantic detail. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'what happens after a form is submitted', then enumerates the concrete action types (default processing, custom message, redirect URL) with conditional logic. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list_* tools for webhooks, emails, and submissions without needing to name them.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The context is implied by the tool's purpose but never stated, which is the 'no guidance' level.

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