Create a form

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

The description discloses crucial behavioral traits not captured by annotations: API-created forms are unpublished by default and do not accept responses, and you must publish them or use set_publish_settings. It also notes the API limitation of only accepting title/document_title at creation. This adds significant behavioral context beyond the structured annotations.

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?

The description is two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and immediately follows with critical usage caveats. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains return values and default behavior. It also provides essential follow-up guidance (sharing responderUri, using add_question/update_form_settings) and clarifies the unpublished state. This is complete for a creation tool of moderate complexity.

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?

The input schema already provides thorough descriptions for all three parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra context by explaining that the API only accepts a title and optional document title at creation, and that questions/settings must be added via other tools, which clarifies the parameter scope and purpose beyond the schema details.

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?

The description explicitly states 'Creates a new Google Form' and lists the return values (formId, revisionId, responderUri, publishSettings), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_form or update_form_info. The verb and resource are specific, with no ambiguity.

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 provides explicit usage guidance: it names sibling tools for subsequent steps ('add questions with add_question and change settings with update_form_settings afterwards') and offers an alternative path for publishing ('pass publish=true to publish immediately, or call set_publish_settings later'). This clearly communicates when and how to use this tool versus alternatives.

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