Get Untappd user check-ins

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

Annotations already carry readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, and the description's 'Read-only' merely reinforces those. It adds genuinely new behavioral context: results are ordered most-recent-first, max_id acts as a backward cursor sourced from a prior call's pagination.max_id, and the payload includes beer/rating/comment/venue/toast data — none of which is encoded in the annotations.

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 short sentences with the core purpose front-loaded; the paging rule and the username-default rule each get their own sentence, and the 'Read-only' tag is a single word. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 compensates by enumerating the returned fields, and the schema's view parameter text fills in the compact/full projection difference. Paging flow and username defaulting are fully covered; only edge behavior (empty results, errors, rate limits) is left undisclosed, which is acceptable for a read-only cursor-paged endpoint with rich annotations.

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters and the view enum's compact/full projection detail. The description adds one operational nuance beyond the schema: max_id is not just an id filter but the pagination.max_id cursor returned by a prior call. That modest addition keeps it at the high-coverage baseline rather than above it.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Get a user's recent check-ins') with an ordering guarantee (most recent first) and enumerates the returned content (beer, rating, comment, venue, toasts/comments). This makes it distinguishable from user-profile siblings like untappd_user_info, untappd_user_beers, and untappd_user_badges 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?

Provides concrete usage rules: page backwards by passing the pagination.max_id from a prior call, and omit username to target the configured account. It stops short of naming alternatives or stating when not to use it (e.g., untappd_checkin_info for a single check-in), so it lacks explicit exclusion guidance.

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