List Forms key sets

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint), so the bar is lower, yet the description still adds real behavior: the result is a flat array, each item's id is an integer suitable for keysets_get, and the raw key download is unavailable via MCP. It stops short of disclosing pagination or auth requirements for a read-only list, which keeps it off a 5.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core statement of what is returned, then the definition, then the routing and the CLI/SDK caveat. No filler and no repetition of the title or schema.

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 usefully characterizes the return shape (flat array, integer id) and the prerequisite lookup path, and annotations carry the safety profile. It is close to complete for a one-parameter list tool; only pagination/result-size behavior is unaddressed.

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 the schema already documents survey_id as a 24-char hex form id with an example, so the structured field carries the semantics. The description's only parameter-relevant contribution is routing the agent to surveys_list to obtain that id, which is usage guidance rather than added meaning. 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Every personal-link key set on a form, as a flat array') and goes further by defining what a key set actually is — a batch of single-use keys that become personal form-filling links. It also distinguishes itself from keysets_get by naming what to pass to that sibling, so an agent can tell the two apart without opening a schema.

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 an explicit prerequisite ('Use surveys_list to find the survey_id first') and an explicit exclusion ('Downloading the actual keys is a binary payload — CLI/SDK-only'), telling the agent both what to do before calling and what this tool will not give them. This is when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, not inference.

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