View your Bundesagentur für Arbeit appointments: default to upcoming planned meetings, or retrieve all appointments sorted newest first by setting upcoming_only to false.
List appointments (default: upcoming planned ones).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| upcoming_only | No | false lists all appointments, newest first |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the default filtering behavior, which is useful, but says nothing about ordering (beyond the schema) or result limits.
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?
A single short sentence that front-loads the action and immediately qualifies the default scope. Nothing is wasted.
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 an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and the one parameter is fully documented. The only gap is the absence of any differentiation from the overlapping meineba_termine sibling.
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% and the single parameter already documents that false lists all appointments newest-first. The description's 'default: upcoming planned ones' reinforces the schema default but adds no new semantic detail. Baseline 3 applies.
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 (List) and resource (appointments) with the default scope clarified as upcoming planned ones. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not distinguish itself from the similarly named sibling meineba_termine.
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?
Usage is implied by the name and the parenthetical default, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus meineba_termine or the add/update_appointment siblings. A reader must infer the context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.