Get Form Fields

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the response structure (properties object, revision string) and lists returned field details. It does not explicitly state it is a read-only, non-destructive operation, but the context implies it. Adding an explicit safety statement would raise the score.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then return details, then usage guidance. It is efficient with no fluff, though slightly wordy. It earns a 4 for being clear and well-structured.

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 3 parameters, high schema coverage, and an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, return structure (properties, revision), and usage context (live/pre-live). It lacks an explicit read-only declaration but is otherwise complete for an agent's decision-making.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds some value by mentioning 'Both live and pre-live app settings retrieval' for the preview parameter, but otherwise does not elaborate beyond the schema's existing descriptions.

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 it gets form field settings from a kintone app, enumerates return details (type, code, label, configuration), and distinguishes from sibling CRUD tools like add-form-fields and update-form-fields.

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 clear when-to-use context: 'Essential for understanding current field structure before add/update/delete operations' and 'Use to verify lookup field configurations.' It does not explicitly say when not to use or offer alternatives, but the context is strong.

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