paydirt_get_form

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by specifying exactly what fields are retrieved (prompt, type, enabled state, Slack assignment) and confirming non-modification. It aligns with annotations and provides context beyond them, though it does not address error cases like invalid form_id.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the usage trigger, and zero wasted words. Every phrase earns its place: what to retrieve, scope, and non-modification. Excellent conciseness for a simple read tool.

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?

Given the low complexity (one parameter, output schema present, annotations covering safety), the description is fully sufficient. It covers when to use, what is retrieved, and the non-modifying behavior. No critical gaps remain for an agent to invoke it 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% with form_id documented as 'The form ID.' The description adds the context that it is for 'one known form,' which implies the ID must reference an existing form. This is marginal added value beyond the schema, earning the baseline 3 for high coverage.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves the current prompt, type, enabled state, or Slack assignment for one known form. It uses the specific verb 'get' with a resource ('form') and scope ('one known form'), distinguishing it from siblings like paydirt_list_forms (which lists all) and paydirt_update_form (which modifies).

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 says 'Use this when the agent needs...' providing a clear when-to-use condition. It also includes a when-not clause with 'Does not modify the form,' implying it is not for modifications. However, it does not explicitly name an alternative tool (e.g., paydirt_update_form), so it falls short of a 5.

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