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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is already structured. The description adds real value beyond that: it discloses the cascade effect that deleting a form also removes its responses, which is non-obvious and critical for an agent weighing the call.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the primary destructive action and the alternate mode appended after the comma. No waste.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers both modes and the cascade side effect. It omits irreversibility/recoverability and permission requirements, which would be valuable for a delete operation.

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 50% – the required 'id' has an empty description while response_id is documented in both schema and description. The description clarifies that 'id' identifies the form and reinforces response_id's alternate mode, but adds no format or constraint details for id.

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 (delete) plus resource (form) and explicitly covers both operational modes: full form deletion or single-response deletion via response_id. An agent can distinguish the two behaviors without opening the 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?

The description tells the agent when to use response_id ('to delete just one response'), which is genuine conditional guidance. However, it offers no guidance on when to prefer this over siblings like forms_responses or forms_write, or on prerequisites/permissions.

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