Get sessions (schedule)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds domain context about return semantics (TotalSignedIn is real attendance vs TotalBooked, cancellation status included), which is genuinely useful, but it discloses nothing about pagination behavior (despite maxPages existing in the schema), rate limits, or auth requirements.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the route and resource, followed by the field inventory. Dense but no filler, and the most decision-relevant cue (date range, attendance metric) comes before the long field list.

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?

With no output schema, the description steps in to sketch the return payload (staff, description, booking/attendance counts, waitlist, capacity, cancellation status), which is the right compensation. It is still thin on pagination and timezone/date-boundary behavior, but no critical invocation detail 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?

Schema description coverage is 83% (siteId, dates, maxPages page size, staffIds all documented), so the schema carries most of the load. The description adds no parameter syntax or format detail beyond it, which matches the baseline 3 for a high-coverage 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 gives a specific verb+resource (GET /class/classes → the session schedule for a date range) and enumerates the returned fields, so an agent knows this is the class-session listing tool. However, it never distinguishes itself from the sibling mbo_get_class_visits, which a caller could easily confuse with a session-schedule endpoint.

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 parenthetical 'use this for show-rate math' hints at a use case, implying the tool's role in attendance analytics. But there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative routing guidance against siblings like mbo_get_class_visits or mbo_get_class_visits.

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