list_reservation_watchesList all registered reservation watches to review active monitoring entries, with an option to include reserved, expired, or cancelled statuses.
현재 등록된 예약 감시 목록을 반환합니다.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| include_inactive | No | True면 RESERVED/EXPIRED/CANCELLED 상태도 포함. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It signals a non-destructive read by saying 'returns', and adds the behavioral nuance 'currently registered'. However, it does not mention ordering, pagination, or whether this is purely read-only, though these are minor for a simple list operation.
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, front-loaded Korean sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation, though it is minimal and could include usage context without becoming verbose.
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 the low complexity, one optional parameter, complete schema documentation, and an output schema, the description is nearly sufficient. Missing usage guidance and explicit read-only wording are gaps, but they do not block correct invocation.
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%, so the parameter semantics are already fully documented: include_inactive controls whether RESERVED/EXPIRED/CANCELLED statuses are included. The description adds no extra parameter context, but none is needed beyond the schema.
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 states a specific verb and resource: it returns the currently registered reservation watch list. This distinguishes it from add/remove/status siblings, though it does not explicitly name an 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?
Usage is implied: the tool returns the list of existing reservation watches FAQs. There is no explicit statement about when to choose this over siblings, but the naming and sibling set make the intended use reasonably clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.