Get the complete sign-up listing as seen in the SignUpGenius wizard, with fuller data than basic created lists for detailed management.
Session mode only. Returns the same sign-up listing the SignUpGenius wizard sees (via /SUGboxAPI.cfm?go=t.getMySignups). Use when you want fuller data than signupgenius_list_created_* provides.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds the meaningful constraint 'Session mode only', which is not captured in the annotations (readOnlyHint: true). It also references the specific endpoint, providing context about the underlying behavior. Since readOnlyHint already covers the read-only nature, the description adds supplementary behavioral context without contradicting annotations.
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 two concise sentences with the most important constraint ('Session mode only') front-loaded. It delivers purpose, endpoint reference, and usage guidance without any redundant content, making every sentence earn its place.
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 zero-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It states what the tool does, when to use it, and a key behavioral constraint (session mode). The level of detail matches the tool's complexity.
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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 per the rubric. The description doesn't need to explain parameters because there are none, and it does not introduce any misleading parameter-related statements.
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 tool 'Returns the same sign-up listing the SignUpGenius wizard sees', identifying the specific resource and action. It also differentiates from siblings by noting it provides 'fuller data than signupgenius_list_created_*', which helps distinguish it from similar list tools, though the reference to a wildcard group is slightly less explicit than naming a specific sibling.
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 explicitly says 'Use when you want fuller data than signupgenius_list_created_* provides', giving clear when-to-use guidance. It also states 'Session mode only' as a prerequisite, effectively telling the agent when it is applicable. This is strong usage direction beyond simply describing the function.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.