signupgenius_report_available

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only, and the description adds meaningful operational context: required auth key, Pro subscription requirement, unsupported session mode, and ownership scope. This helps the agent anticipate failures and scope without contradicting the readOnlyHint.

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 core purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the remaining sentences each carry necessary usage/scoping or alternative-routing information. Slightly heavier formatting (em-dashes, full caps) keeps it dense but not bloated.

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 without an output schema, the description covers the input, auth, ownership constraint, and the sibling to prefer when the user needs broader availability. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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%, with signupId already described as 'Sign-up ID (signupid).' The description reinforces that a sign-up is meant but adds no new syntactic or source details 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 action and resource: a report of a sign-up limited to open/empty slots, which is clearly distinct from report_filled and report_all. It also differentiates itself by naming the sibling signupgenius_list_slots for broader availability data.

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 states prerequisites (SIGNUPGENIUS_USER_KEY/Pro subscription), exclusions (session mode not supported, only key-holder-created sheets), and names the preferred alternative for broader use cases (signupgenius_list_slots, no auth). This leaves no ambiguity about when to invoke this tool.

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