Get web form submissions

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavior. It only says 'Get submissions' and does not mention pagination behavior, how `limit` affects results, default ordering, response shape, or error conditions. For a retrieval tool this is a mild but real transparency 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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The parenthetical '(results)' usefully clarifies that 'submissions' refers to the submitted data. All words earn their place.

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 simple get-by-form operation with two parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient: it names the resource and what is returned. Still, it omits practical context like pagination/default ordering and how `limit` interacts with retrieval, leaving an agent to infer behavior.

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%, and the description does not explain either `formId` or `limit` beyond the raw schema. The description adds no parameter meaning; it does not state that formId identifies the web form, that limit caps returned results, or what the limit's maximum of 5000 implies.

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 a specific resource ('submissions (results) for a web form'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like gambot_get_document_submissions and gambot_get_form because it targets web-form submissions rather than document submissions or form metadata.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: whenever submission results for a web form are needed. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives such as gambot_get_document_submissions, so the guidance is adequate but implicit.

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