signupgenius_report_available

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

Annotations only supply readOnlyHint/openWorldHint; the description goes well beyond them by disclosing auth prerequisites (Pro key), a hard scope limit (creator-owned sheets only), and unsupported session mode — all material facts an agent cannot infer from the annotation set.

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, zero filler, and the most decision-relevant constraint (what the report contains) is front-loaded before the auth caveats and the alternative recommendation.

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?

Covers auth, scope, and sibling routing thoroughly for a one-parameter report tool. The only omission is what the returned report actually looks like — no output schema exists here, so a brief note on the return shape would have closed the last gap.

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?

There is a single parameter (signupId) and the schema already documents it at 100% coverage with type and constraints, so the description adds nothing parameter-specific. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema fully carries the load.

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?

States a specific verb+resource combination ('report for a sign-up') with an explicit scope ('restricted to slots that are still open/empty'), which cleanly separates it from the sibling report_all and report_filled variants without opening their schemas.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use conditions: requires SIGNUPGENIUS_USER_KEY with a Pro subscription, session mode is unsupported, and only sheets the key-holder created are covered. It also names an alternative (signupgenius_list_slots) with the precise condition that selects it and notes that it needs no auth.

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