uof_custom_get_form_structure

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

無 annotations，但描述自行揭露輸出限制（只有 fieldId 與名稱，無型別），雖未提及權限或副作用，但對於唯讀查詢已足夠。

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?

兩句話完成目的、使用時機與差異說明，無冗餘字詞，結構簡潔。

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?

對於單參數的查詢工具，已涵蓋目的、使用指引與輸出限制，配合輸出 schema 即可達成完整性。

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?

僅一個參數，schema 已覆蓋 100%，描述補充了參數來源（由 get_form_list 的 recentVersionId 取得），增加實用語意。

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?

明確指出動詞「取得」、資源「欄位結構」，並強調只含 fieldId 與名稱無型別，與 siblings 中的 get_form_structure_by_id 區分開來。

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?

明確指示何時使用（只有 formVersionId 時），並建議替代工具（get_form_structure_by_id）以獲取更完整資訊。

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