get_form

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive, and the description reinforces this with 'Reads only; the form is not modified and no submission is created.' It adds extra context beyond annotations by requiring an API key and clarifying that returning embed code does not publish anything.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: returns, use cases, alternatives, safety, auth, and embed code nuance. The main action is front-loaded, and the description is compact without redundancy.

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 effectively explains what is returned: fields, embed code, and redirect destination. It also covers side effects (none), auth requirements, and sibling tool relationships, making it complete for a simple read 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 100% for form_id, so the schema already fully documents the only parameter. The description adds context about what the returned form contains but does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get one signup form in full' and details what is included—fields, embed code, and redirect behavior. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly naming get_form_submissions and list_forms.

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?

It gives explicit use cases: need the embed snippet or need to know its fields before interpreting submissions. It also tells the agent when NOT to use it by directing to get_form_submissions for submitted data and list_forms for the list of forms, making alternatives clear.

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