Get Form Field Placement Condition

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered without the description. The description adds nothing beyond that — no error/not-found behavior, no rate limits, no indication of what a 'condition' record contains. It essentially restates the name.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is tight but borders on under-specification rather than elegant brevity.

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 single-parameter getter with an output schema present and a fully documented id, the description supplies enough for an agent to invoke it correctly. Only the failure mode for a bad id is left undocumented, which is a minor gap at this complexity level.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, including a useful note that it maps to `{id}` in the URL and is not named `form_field_placement_condition_id`. The description itself contributes no parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Retrieves') and a specific resource ('form_field_placement_condition') scoped to a single record by id. An agent can distinguish it from sibling list/get tools such as get_form_field_placement or get_form_set_condition by resource name, though the description does no explicit sibling differentiation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus listing/filtering tools, no prerequisites, no mention of what happens if the id is unknown. The only procedural hint lives in the schema's id description, not the tool description.

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