hs_form_submissions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states what the tool returns but does not disclose behavioral traits such as ordering, pagination behavior, permissions needed, or rate limits. The agent has no insight into side effects or access requirements.

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 a single sentence of 13 words, front-loaded with verb and resource. No unnecessary words, and every part contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is concise but lacks detail on the exact output structure (e.g., array of objects, field names). It mentions 'all field values' but doesn't specify the format. Adequate for basic understanding but could be more complete.

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 67% (two of three parameters have descriptions). The description adds context by specifying the output includes 'all field values and submission timestamps', implying that the limit parameter controls how many recent submissions. This adds slight value beyond the schema, but does not detail parameters further. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get recent submissions for a form including all field values and submission timestamps.' The verb 'get' and resource 'recent submissions for a form' are specific. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'hs_get_form' which likely returns form structure, not submissions.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where other tools might be more appropriate, such as when needing form definitions (hs_get_form) or other types of submissions.

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