Get one response

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful detail about the returned structure (answers keyed by questionId, createTime, lastSubmittedTime, respondentEmail, and totalScore 'when available'), which discloses conditional behavior not captured by 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 front-loaded with the primary action ('Fetches a single submission by its responseId') and then provides a compact list of return fields and a cross-tool hint. Two sentences with no filler, each sentence earning its place.

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 get-by-id tool with no output schema, the description fully covers the expected return values and the necessary mapping step for interpreting questionIds. Combined with good annotations and schema, the agent has all context needed to invoke and use the tool correctly.

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 comprehensive descriptions for both parameters (form_id and response_id), with 100% coverage. The description reinforces the response_id source ('from list_responses') but does not add substantial new meaning 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Fetches') and identifies the resource ('a single submission'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tool list_responses which retrieves multiple responses. It also lists the fields returned, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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 explicitly states that the responseId comes from list_responses, indicating a clear call sequence, and advises using get_form to map questionIds to question text. This gives direct guidance on when to use this tool and how it relates to sibling tools.

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