list_signups

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It reveals that the tool returns summaries with title, progress, and author, illustrates the progress format, and notes that detailed items require get_post. It omits auth or pagination-depth caveats, but these are minor for a read-only listing with an output schema.

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 description is front-loaded with the core purpose, then provides a compact output summary, a useful cross-reference, and a short Args block. It is efficiently sized, though the Args section somewhat duplicates the input schema.

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 two-parameter list tool, the description plus schema covers the required school_id, optional page, the fields returned, and the follow-up path to get_post. The presence of an output schema covers return shape, so an agent has enough to call it correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It restates school_id as 'School ID' and page as 'Page number for pagination (default: 1)', adding the default but little else. It does not explain page size, response ordering, or how school_id relates to feeds, so it only partially compensates for the absent schema descriptions.

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 verb and resource: 'List sign-up and RSVP posts for a school', with concrete examples such as item donations, volunteer slots, and event RSVPs. This clearly separates it from sibling list tools like list_links or list_notices and from get_post.

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 directs agents to 'Use get_post with the feed_id to see full signup details including individual items', giving a concrete alternative for deeper detail. It does not, however, enumerate exclusions or compare against other list_* siblings, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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