signupgenius_report_all

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds valuable behavioral constraints: session mode is unsupported, SIGNUPGENIUS_USER_KEY is required, and coverage is limited to sheets created by the key-holder. It also describes the report contents, which goes beyond the annotation.

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?

Two sentences with no filler; the core purpose is front-loaded, followed by essential auth/scope limitations and the sibling alternative. Every clause adds decision-relevant 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 single-parameter read-only report tool, the description covers what the report contains, who can use it, what credentials are required, what it does not cover, and which alternative to choose for broader slot data. No meaningful gap remains.

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 100% for the single signupId parameter, which the schema already documents as the sign-up ID. The description implies the ID identifies the sign-up for the report but adds no additional format or behavior beyond the 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 states a specific deliverable: a full report of every slot plus the claiming participant, including custom-question answers. This clearly distinguishes it from slot-oriented listing tools, and the scope (only sheets the key-holder created) is explicit.

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 when to use this tool (full reports on the key-holder's own created sheets) and when to prefer signupgenius_list_slots instead (slot dates/times/availability on any sign-up). It also flags the Pro subscription and auth requirement, giving an agent a concrete decision rule.

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