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 only states what the tool does ('get form layout') without disclosing behavioral traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what format the layout information is returned in. For a read operation with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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, efficient sentence in Japanese that directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool with one parameter.

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?

For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'form layout' means in practical terms, what data structure is returned, or any behavioral aspects. While the parameter is well-documented in the schema, the overall context for using this tool is insufficient.

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% with the single parameter 'app_id' well-documented in the schema as 'kintoneアプリのID'. The description doesn't add any additional parameter context beyond what's in the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('取得します' - get/retrieve) and the resource ('kintoneアプリのフォームレイアウト' - kintone app form layout). It's specific about what is being retrieved, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_preview_form_layout' which appears to serve a similar purpose for preview versions.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites, context for usage, or comparison with sibling tools like 'get_preview_form_layout' or 'get_form_fields' that might retrieve related information.

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