Get Basecamp Questionnaire

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds return behavior (number of questions and URL) but lacks details on error conditions, permissions, or response format beyond that.

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?

Two sentences with no redundant information. Front-loaded with action and resource. Every word adds value.

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 low complexity (1 param, no output schema), description is mostly adequate but could clarify the return format (e.g., whether URL is for the questionnaire itself) and mention error cases. Annotations cover safety, so not a major gap.

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% (parameter has basic description). Tool description does not add new semantic meaning for the parameter, e.g., how to obtain questionnaire_id or its relationship to a project. Baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves a questionnaire (check-ins container) for a project, with specific return info (number of questions and URL). The name 'questionnaire' distinguishes it from sibling 'get_question' and other get_* tools.

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 tool vs alternatives, such as when to use get_questionnaire versus get_question or list_questions. No prerequisites or context provided (e.g., how to obtain questionnaire_id).

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