get_registrations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions a constraint ('max 2 months') but doesn't cover important aspects like whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are needed, how results are returned (e.g., pagination, format), or error conditions. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Get all your meal registrations') and adds a useful constraint ('max 2 months'). There's no wasted text, and it's appropriately sized for a simple query tool.

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 tool's low complexity (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate but has clear gaps. It covers the basic purpose and a constraint but lacks usage guidelines, behavioral details, and output information. Without annotations or output schema, the agent must infer too much about how to use this tool effectively.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters ('from' and 'to') clearly documented in the input schema. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by implying date-range filtering but doesn't provide additional semantic context like date format validation or the 'max 2 months' constraint applying to the range. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('your meal registrations') with a specific scope ('in a date range'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_registration' (singular) or 'get_extra_registrations', which could cause confusion about scope.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_registration' (singular) or 'get_extra_registrations'. It mentions a constraint ('max 2 months') but doesn't explain when this tool is appropriate compared to other registration-related tools in the sibling list.

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