aidoo_list_checkins

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

Annotations are none, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only listing but does not state it explicitly. No mention of output format, default ordering, pagination behavior beyond the schema defaults, or any side effects. The description is too sparse to disclose behavioral traits beyond the literal action.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it easy to scan. It could include a bit more useful detail, but it remains appropriately concise for a simple list operation.

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 list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description gives the core purpose but lacks complete context. It does not describe return values, pagination behavior, or default sorting. However, the schema covers parameters, so the tool is minimally usable. The description is adequate but leaves clear gaps that a user might need to infer.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning: 'oder filtere nach Kriterien' hints at the existence of filter parameters but does not enumerate them. The schema already documents limit, offset, max_date, min_date, and member_id, so the description does not significantly improve parameter understanding.

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 the verb and resource clearly: 'Liste alle Check-ins auf' (list all check-ins). It also mentions optional filtering. This distinguishes it from siblings like aidoo_create_checkin or aidoo_list_bookings, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives. The purpose is clear, but the phrasing 'oder filtere nach Kriterien' is somewhat generic without naming the specific criteria.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The description only states what the tool does ('List or filter check-ins') without providing context for when filtering is appropriate or how it relates to other list tools. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use information is provided.

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