signupgenius_get_public_signup

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only, and the description adds useful context: no authentication is required, it works for public/external sheets, and it returns metadata only, not availability or slot data. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: what it does, what it returns, and how it differs from the closest sibling. The most important scoping detail (metadata only) is placed at the end but is clearly stated, and there is no filler or repetition.

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 enumerates the returned metadata fields in sufficient detail and clarifies the no-auth/public-sheet scope. It also tells the agent where to go for slot-level data, making the tool contextually complete for a single-parameter lookup.

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 single parameter has 100% schema description coverage, including the slug format and accepted forms. The tool description adds a slightly different URL example, but the schema already carries the meaning, so the description provides only marginal additional value.

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 a specific verb ('Look up') and resource (a SignUpGenius sign-up by public URL or slug), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly saying it returns metadata only and not slots. This is unambiguous and differentiated.

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?

It explicitly says when to use this tool (public signup lookup by URL/slug, no auth, works for sheets the user did not create) and names the alternative for a different need: use signupgenius_list_slots for dates/times and availability. This gives the agent a clear decision rule.

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