get_questions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Get' clearly indicates a read-only operation, and 'pre-session questions (data collection form)' tells the user what to expect. However, it doesn't mention potential errors or auth requirements, but for a simple getter this is sufficient.

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, clear sentence with no redundancy. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word contributes value.

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 low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description explains what is returned (pre-session questions) and for which context (Harmonica session). It doesn't detail the exact structure of the return value, but that is not necessary for such a simple getter.

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 already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter session_id with a clear description '(UUID)'. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool 'Get pre-session questions (data collection form)' with a specific verb and resource, and clarifies the domain context 'for a Harmonica session'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_responses and submit_questions by specifying 'pre-session questions'.

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 phrase 'for a Harmonica session' provides clear context for when to use this tool, but no explicit alternatives or exclusions are mentioned. Since there are sibling tools like get_responses and submit_questions, a brief 'when not to use' would be helpful but isn't strictly necessary.

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