List forms

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, covering the read-only and open-ended nature of the operation. The description adds only the location scoping and downstream use of returned form ids; it does not disclose pagination behavior or response details beyond the presence of form ids.

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 two short sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the action and scope, and the second explains why the returned ids matter. Information is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 simple read-only list endpoint with three optional parameters and no output schema, this description is largely sufficient: it identifies the resource, the location scoping, and how to use the returned ids. Pagination is implied by skip/limit in the schema, and the openWorldHint annotation covers the open-ended nature.

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 only 33%, and the description does not compensate for the undocumented skip and limit parameters. 'List forms in a location' adds no meaningful semantics beyond locationId, which is already described in the schema. The agent gets no extra guidance on pagination or parameter behavior.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('List forms in a location') and explains the downstream use of returned form ids for fetching submissions. This clearly distinguishes the tool from the sibling ghl_get_form_submissions, though it does not explicitly name that alternative.

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?

'List forms in a location. Use the returned form ids to fetch submissions' provides a clear context: call this when you need form ids to later fetch submissions. It does not state when not to use the tool or explicitly reference a sibling tool, but the intended workflow is clear.

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