Get Forms page show condition

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by naming the returned payload shape (operator and clause items), which the annotations cannot convey. It stops short of noting missing-id behavior or any fetch caveats.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states the resource, the lookup key, and the returned fields with no filler. Slightly telegraphic (em-dash fragment), but every element earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description partially covers return values (operator, items) but does not characterize the response further, and says nothing about not-found or error behavior. Annotations carry the safety profile, and params are fully documented, so it is adequate but leaves gaps for a getter whose contract is otherwise unstructured.

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% and all three required params (survey_id, page_id, condition_id) are documented in the schema itself, including their source tools. The description only restates 'by id' and adds no format, source, or constraint detail beyond the schema. 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 resource and scope: one condition group of a page retrieved by id, including the fields it returns (operator, items). This implicitly distinguishes it from the question/submit/hook condition getters, though it never names a sibling explicitly. Clear verb-resource pairing, just short of full sibling differentiation.

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, no mention of prerequisites (e.g. that condition_id comes from a list call), and no routing away from forms_conditions_page_list or the question/submit/hook variants. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name.

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