getForm

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the return format (status and message array) and the behavior when not found (empty or HTTP 404). This goes beyond what annotations provide, though it doesn't elaborate on other traits like authentication requirements.

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?

The description is very concise, using only four short lines. It is front-loaded with the core action and uses clear section headers (Use when, Required, See also, Returns). Every sentence adds value with no fluff.

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?

The tool is simple (one required parameter, read-only, fixed return structure). The description covers purpose, usage context, required parameter, related sibling, and return format including error scenario. With no output schema, the description compensates fully. It is complete for the given complexity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only repeats 'Required: form_id.' without adding meaning about what form_id is, any format constraints, or examples. The schema already defines type and required status, so the description adds negligible value for this parameter.

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 explicitly states 'Get a single form - Fetch a single form record. Read-only.' This clearly identifies the verb (get) and resource (single form), and distinguishes from siblings like listForms by specifying scope. The read-only annotation reinforces the purpose.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance: 'Use when: fetching one form's metadata.' and references sibling 'listForms (enumerate many).' This tells the agent when to use this tool and when to use an alternative, satisfying the usage guidelines dimension.

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