List Forms integration variables

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that each item carries a type, its arguments, and supported renderers — useful return-shape context — but says nothing about auth needs, scoping, or pagination. No contradiction with annotations.

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 tight sentences with no filler; the resource description is front-loaded and the practical usage note follows. The first sentence is a noun fragment, but it is efficient and every sentence 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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of describing returns — and it does, naming the item fields (type, arguments, renderers) and an example type. For a single-parameter read-only list tool this is nearly complete; only pagination/scoping 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% with a single required survey_id already documented as a 24-char hex form id. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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 the resource clearly — the variable types a form's integrations can reference — and gives concrete examples (form.answer_url, form.question_answer). Combined with the title it is unambiguous, though it reads as describing returned content rather than naming the list action, and it does not explicitly distinguish itself from other forms_* siblings.

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?

It hints at downstream usage ('put one into a subscription's variables to use it'), which implies you call this to discover variables before creating/configuring a subscription. However there is no explicit when-to-use, no when-not, and no named alternative among the many forms_subscriptions_* siblings.

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