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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, establishing this as a safe read operation. The description adds meaningful context that retrieval is private and requires the owner token, but it does not disclose behavior on invalid tokens or describe the return shape.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes: the action, the resource, the privacy aspect, and the authentication requirement.

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 read-only tool, the description provides the essential context: what is retrieved (form and answers), how it is accessed (owner token), and the privacy level. It omits response structure or error behavior, but this is not critical given the simplicity of the 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It maps id to the form being retrieved and token to the owner token, giving both parameters meaningful semantics despite not explicitly stating formats.

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 the core operation with a specific verb (retrieve), a clear resource (a form and its answers), and an explicit access condition (owner token). It differentiates itself from siblings like collect_read_form by focusing on answers, though it does not name the sibling explicitly.

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?

Provides clear context: use this tool when you need to retrieve a form and its answers and you have the owner token. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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