list_formsRetrieve active forms from SalesSuite CRM sorted newest first, with pagination via page and pageSize.
Get Forms.
Retrieves active forms sorted by creation date, newest first.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number (0 is the first page) | |
| pageSize | No | Items per page (1-100) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two genuinely useful facts beyond the annotations: results are limited to active forms and are ordered newest-first. It says nothing about pagination totals or how many forms may exist, but with annotations carrying the behavioral burden a 3 is fair.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource then the ordering constraint; nothing extraneous. The leading 'Get Forms.' merely restates the name and title, a small 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?
For a simple filtered list with no output schema, the description covers scope and ordering but leaves the shape of a returned form (fields, ID, status) entirely unspecified. Adequate to invoke, but an agent cannot predict what it will receive.
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% and both page and pageSize are fully documented with defaults and ranges in the schema. The description adds no pagination or syntax detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the 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 states a specific verb and resource ('Retrieves active forms') and adds ordering ('sorted by creation date, newest first'). It implicitly separates this from list_form_submissions by scoping to forms rather than submissions, though it never names that sibling explicitly.
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?
There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as list_form_submissions. The only usable cue is the implicit 'active' filter, which an agent must infer selects a subset of forms.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.