Get web form

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic retrieval action and gives no detail about what the definition contains, whether the operation has side effects, what errors may occur, or what the response looks like. The verb 'Get' implies read-only behavior, but that is not made explicit.

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 concise sentence with no filler or repetition. It front-loads the core action and resource. It is appropriately brief for such a simple single-parameter tool, though it could have used the space to add more behavioral or parameter context.

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?

For a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter description, the definition is under-specified. The agent is left without information about the return value, possible failure modes, or how formId should be supplied. More context is needed for reliable invocation.

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%, yet the description adds no meaning about the formId parameter beyond what its name implies. It does not explain how to obtain formId, its format, or its role in retrieving the definition. With no schema description and no parameter detail in the tool description, the agent gets minimal semantic help.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('single web form definition'), clearly indicating this tool retrieves one form by ID. The word 'single' differentiates it from gambot_list_forms, and 'definition' separates it from form links or submissions. This is clear, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus siblings like gambot_list_forms, gambot_get_form_link, or gambot_get_form_submissions. No prerequisites, alternatives, or exclusions are mentioned. Usage is only weakly implied by the phrase 'single web form definition.'

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