get_form_info

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description only needs to add context. It clarifies the exact metadata returned (counts, status, permissions), which is useful, but says nothing about permissions needed or freshness/staleness of the counts.

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?

A single tight sentence that front-loads the verb and lists the payload in order. No filler, though the field enumeration makes it slightly list-like.

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?

An output schema exists, so return format need not be described, and the read-only annotation covers safety. Combined with a fully documented single parameter, the definition is nearly complete; only sibling routing is missing.

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 a single form_id param fully documented, so the description carries no additional parameter burden. Baseline 3 applies since the schema does the explanatory work.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (form) and enumerates the returned metadata: submission counts, open/closed status, edit permissions. However, it does not distinguish itself from close siblings like get_form_settings, get_form_definition, or get_form_settings_validation, which an agent must choose between.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance or when-not condition, and no alternative is named despite many read-oriented sibling tools. The enumerated return fields only implicitly suggest the tool's scope.

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