parse-teams-url

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

The description discloses that it performs a conversion, which is a read-only transformation consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds format-specific details beyond the annotation (enumerating URL types) but does not mention potential error handling or edge cases (e.g., invalid URLs), which would be the next level of transparency.

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 sentences with no superfluous words. The core action is front-loaded, and the usage guidance is concise. Every word contributes meaning.

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 simple single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, and what input forms are expected. Nothing an agent needs to correctly invoke it is missing.

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?

While the schema already describes the parameter as 'Teams meeting URL in any format', the description enriches this by specifying the exact format variants accepted. This additional semantic detail helps the agent understand what constitutes a valid input and goes beyond the generic schema description.

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 explicitly states that the tool converts Teams meeting URLs into a standard joinWebUrl, enumerating the specific accepted formats (short /meet/, full /meetup-join/, recap ?threadId=). It clearly distinguishes its purpose from the mentioned sibling list-online-meetings by indicating when it should be used as a precursor.

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 gives an explicit usage directive: 'Use this before list-online-meetings when the user provides a recap or short URL.' This tells the agent exactly when to invoke this tool and points to the alternative, though it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it for full URLs, the implication is clear enough.

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