indico_list_registration_forms

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the bar is lower, and the description adds an auth requirement (the 'Registrants' token scope) that an agent cannot infer from structured fields. It does not discuss pagination or result ordering, but the required-scope disclosure is genuine added value.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the core purpose and the auth prerequisite front-loaded. Every clause earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, annotations cover the safety profile, and the schema covers both parameters. The description supplies purpose and the token-scope requirement, leaving little missing for a simple read-only list tool.

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 both event_id and instance are already documented in the schema, including the /event/<id>/ hint and default-instance behavior. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond 'an event's', so the 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 clear verb+resource ('List an event's registration forms') and adds scope detail ('with registration counts'), which distinguishes it from indico_list_registrations and indico_get_registration. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so it falls just short of 5.

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 only usage signal is the prerequisite 'Needs the Registrants token scope', which is helpful but is a permission gate rather than when-to-use guidance. No condition or alternative (e.g., use indico_list_registrations to see individual registrants) is offered.

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