list_forms

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read-only nature (listing) but doesn't specify what happens if the return_id is invalid, whether it returns only form identifiers or full details, or any output format. For a read operation, the missing behavior context is a notable gap.

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 a single, short sentence with no waste. The core action and scope are front-loaded, making it efficient for agents to parse.

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 with one required parameter and no output schema, so the description is mostly adequate. However, it lacks information on what forms the output contains (e.g., form IDs, statuses) and any edge case behaviors. Given the simplicity, it's acceptable but could be clearer on the return value.

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?

The schema has only one parameter with 0% description coverage, so the description must clarify its meaning beyond the type. The description mentions 'in a tax return' which implies return_id is the tax return identifier, adding some context. However, it doesn't specify the format or constraints, but given the low complexity, this is minimally adequate.

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 clear verb ('List') and resource ('forms') with a scope ('in a tax return'), distinguishing it from siblings like list_returns and list_concepts. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from list_returns or list_concepts beyond the resource name, but the purpose is reasonably clear.

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 implies use when you need forms within a specific tax return, suggested by the 'in a tax return' scope, especially compared to list_returns for listing returns. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or what alternatives exist, leaving some inference to the agent.

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