field_dropdown_items

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the transparency burden. It does disclose that the tool opens the dropdown and returns choices, and includes a 'when exposed by the API' caveat. However, it does not mention side effects such as whether the dropdown remains open, cleanup, permissions, or error behavior.

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 core action is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the second sentence adds convenience context. The sibling reference is useful though slightly separated into a second paragraph; the overall length is acceptable and each sentence contributes.

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 zero schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description does not adequately cover the tool's parameter semantics or return behavior. It conveys the basic purpose but leaves significant gaps for an agent to invoke the tool with confidence.

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%, so the description carries the full burden of explaining parameters. It mentions 'field_name' only indirectly as the form field dropdown, and provides no meaning for timeout, session_id, or search_by_title, all of which are left entirely to the schema's type/default fields.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Open a form field dropdown and return visible choice items.' It also differentiates from the sibling field_dropdown_state by noting that the latter is for non-mutating diagnostics, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly frames the tool as a convenience action for the common 'open dropdown and read choices' scenario and directs the agent to use field_dropdown_state for non-mutating diagnostics of an already-open dropdown. This gives clear when-to-use and when-to-use-alternative guidance.

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