signupgenius_report_all

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses substantial behavioral context: the auth requirement (Pro subscription user key), the unsupported session mode, the scope limitation (only sheets the key-holder created), and the inclusion of custom-question answers when present. No contradiction with the readOnlyHint 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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: core purpose front-loaded first, then auth/scope constraints, then alternative routing. Zero filler or repetition of schema content.

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 explains the return content (slots, participants, custom-question answers) and fully discloses auth, scope, and session restrictions. Only minor gap: no mention of error behavior when given a signupId not owned by the key-holder, but this is well-covered by the explicit scope warning.

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 100%, with the signupId parameter already documented as 'Sign-up ID (signupid).' The description doesn't add parameter-specific syntax or formatting detail, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema fully carries the parameter documentation burden.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Full report for a sign-up' and details exactly what it returns ('every slot plus the participant who claimed it, with custom-question answers when present'). This content distinguishes it sharply from siblings like signupgenius_report_available and signupgenius_report_filled, which clearly cover filtered subsets, as well as signupgenius_list_slots.

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?

Explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: the description states this tool requires the Pro SIGNUPGENIUS_USER_KEY and only covers sheets the key-holder created, then explicitly routes agents to signupgenius_list_slots for slot dates/times/availability on any sign-up, noting that alternative 'needs no auth.' Nothing is left to inference.

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