list_forms

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds ordering (newest first), returned summary fields, and pagination semantics ("nextCursor is null on the last page"). Useful extra context, though return shape is also in the output schema.

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?

Front-loads what the tool returns, then use cases, then pagination mechanics. Three short sentences with no filler, each carrying distinct information.

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 read-only paginated list with full schema coverage, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description covers scope, ordering, filtering, and pagination handoff. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds operational meaning beyond the schema: `query` filters by name, and `cursor` is taken from the previous call to fetch the next page with the terminal-page signal. `limit` is left entirely to the schema, which documents it well.

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 a specific verb and resource ("List the forms you own"), plus scope, ordering (newest first), and the fields returned (status, response count, public URL). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings such as list_form_responses (responses, not forms) and get_form (single form by id).

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?

Gives concrete when-to-use cases: recovering a lost form_id or checking which forms are still live, and explains filtering via `query`. It does not name an explicit alternative or when-not-to-use case (e.g., use get_form when you already have the id), 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.