get_signups

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it usefully discloses that the operation is read-only and costs one API call, which matters against the many mutating signup siblings. It omits auth requirements, result format, and pagination 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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the resource and outcome, followed by two brief parenthetical qualifiers for the date format and read-only/API-cost traits. No wasted words.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description states the resource, the scope, the date format, the read-only nature, and the API cost. It could say more about the returned structure, but what an agent needs to call it is largely present.

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 coverage is 0% and the 'date' property has no description, so the description must compensate. It does so by specifying the expected format '(date AAAA-MM-JJ)', which is exactly the missing information an agent needs to invoke correctly.

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 ('Liste') and resource ('les champs du planning et les inscriptions') scoped to a single day, which implicitly distinguishes it from get_signups_range. It does not name the range sibling explicitly, so differentiation requires inference from the '(une journée)' scoping.

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 single-day scope implies when this tool applies versus get_signups_range or the add_signup/update_signup mutators, but no explicit when-to-use, prerequisites, or alternatives are stated. Usage is inferable rather than spelled out.

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