List every sign-up you created, including active and expired ones. View all your SignUpGenius sign-ups in a single response for easy tracking.
List ALL sign-ups created by the authenticated user (active and expired).
| 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 annotation readOnlyHint=true already signals a safe read operation. The description adds the context that both active and expired sign-ups are included, which is helpful but doesn't disclose other behaviors like pagination or return format. Given the simple nature of the tool and the annotation, this is adequate but not rich.
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, focused sentence that immediately states the verb, resource, and scope. It contains no filler or redundant information.
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 simple list-all tool with no parameters and readOnlyHint annotation, the description provides sufficient context for selection and invocation. It doesn't mention return format or ordering, but such details are not critical for this tool's simplicity.
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 tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so there are no parameter details to explain. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description does not need to compensate since there is nothing to clarify.
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 lists ALL sign-ups created by the authenticated user, explicitly including both active and expired. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_created_active and list_created_expired, which have narrower scopes.
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's mention of 'ALL' and 'active and expired' implicitly tells the agent to use this tool when needing the full set of sign-ups, versus status-specific siblings. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use, so it's clear but not fully explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.