signupgenius_report_filled

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true; the description adds substantive context: authentication requires a Pro subscription key, session mode is unsupported, and the tool is limited to sheets the key-holder created. It does not describe the report's output shape, but given the simple read-only report nature, this is a minor gap.

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 deliver the purpose, constraints, and routing to the correct sibling with no filler. The core definition is front-loaded and every clause carries useful 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 one-parameter, read-only report tool, the description covers purpose, auth prerequisites, scope restrictions, and the alternative tool. The only missing piece is the exact return format, but no output schema exists and the report name implies the content.

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% and the single signupId parameter is already described as 'Sign-up ID (signupid).' The description confirms the scope ('a sign-up') but adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action and resource: 'Report for a sign-up restricted to slots that have already been filled.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from report_all and report_available without opening 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?

The description explicitly names signupgenius_list_slots as the preferred alternative for slot dates/times/availability and states the conditions: reports need a SIGNUPGENIUS_USER_KEY, session mode is not supported, and only key-holder-created sheets are covered. This is clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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