Get Form Layout

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation or that it has no side effects. It mentions support for live and preview environments but lacks safety guarantees. The permissions hinted in the schema are not reinforced in the description.

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 concise at two sentences, efficiently stating purpose and usage. It front-loads the core action and resource. There is no redundancy or verbosity, earning a high score.

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?

The description covers the returned structure (rows, subtables, groups) and usage context. With an output schema present, return value explanation is not required. However, missing explicit behavioral transparency (read-only nature) leaves a gap, making it barely adequate.

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 coverage is 100% with param descriptions. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only noting support for live and pre-live settings. This provides context for the 'preview' parameter but does not elaborate further.

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 retrieves form layout from a kintone app, specifying the action 'Get' and resource 'form layout'. It differentiates from siblings by emphasizing understanding arrangement before updates, distinguishing from get-form-fields and update-form-layout.

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 explicit usage context: 'Use to understand current form arrangement before layout updates' and 'Essential when adding new fields...or rearranging existing fields'. It does not mention alternatives like get-form-fields but the context is clear enough for agent to infer when to use this tool.

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