Set Form Publish State

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description's additional context—'Configures basic form settings'—adds limited behavioral insight. It does not reveal potential side effects, auth requirements, or limitations beyond the annotation hints.

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 concise sentences with no extraneous information. The first sentence is direct; the second is slightly vague but does not detract from brevity. The structure is front-loaded with the core action.

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 simple schema, rich annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description is adequate but not fully complete. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., form must exist) or explain what 'provides guidance' means operationally.

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 100%, so the description adds no extra meaning beyond what the input schema provides. The description's phrase 'basic form settings' loosely maps to the accepting_responses parameter but does not enhance understanding of the other parameters.

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 the verb 'Control' and the resource 'whether a Google Form is accepting responses', making the core function unmistakable. It also distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'publish_form_publicly' by focusing on response acceptance rather than public visibility.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions providing 'guidance for full response control via the Forms UI', implying that the UI is needed for comprehensive settings, but does not clarify when to choose this tool over other form-related tools.

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