List forms

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the safety profile ('Read-only'), the tenant-scoping boundary, and the returned fields. It stops short of pagination/result-count behavior, which for a list-everything tool is the one meaningful remaining gap.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the scope, then the return shape, then the routing guidance. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description enumerates the returned fields (id, name, description, field count, timestamps), so the agent knows what to expect. Combined with the read-only and tenant-scope notes, nothing needed to call it correctly 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless tool is 4. The description correctly implies the tenant filter is implicit rather than an argument.

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 (list) and resource (forms) plus the scoping boundary (the API key's tenant), and explicitly distinguishes itself from get_form by noting the latter returns field definitions. An agent can route between these without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit ordering instruction ('use this first to find a form's id before calling get_form, list_submissions or delete_form') and names the alternative plus the condition that selects it ('use get_form when you need the field definitions'). No inference required.

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