get_survey_responses

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), the description adds: 'Authenticated via API key. Max 10 concurrent requests. Read-only, safe to retry.' This provides authentication method, rate limits, and idempotency characteristics. 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?

The description is concise and well-structured. It begins with a clear one-line summary, followed by an explanatory sentence, then authentication/rate-limit info, and finally parameter descriptions. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters, no enums, no nested objects, and an output schema exists, the description covers usage, pagination, authentication, and account selection. It mentions the return format ('JSON with the list of survey responses'). Adequate for an AI agent to use correctly.

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 description adds meaning to each parameter: survey_id as 'unique id of the survey', count as 'Number of records to return per page (default 10)', offset as 'Number of records to skip for pagination (default 0)', and account as 'Optional account name... Omit to use the default account.' This is valuable given the schema description coverage is 0%.

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 clearly states 'List responses for a single survey' and 'Retrieves the individual responses submitted to the specified survey.' It uses a specific verb (list/retrieve) and resource (responses), and the scope is well-defined (single survey). Differentiates from sibling tools like get_survey_response and list_surveys.

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 guidance on pagination ('Use count and offset to page through large result sets') and account selection ('Optional account name... Omit to use the default account. See list_accounts'). It implies when to use this tool (for listing responses) versus the single-response tool, but does not explicitly state when not to use it.

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