meetings_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It doesn't disclose whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are needed, whether it's paginated, rate-limited, or what the return format looks like. 'Search' implies querying, but behavioral details like performance characteristics or error conditions are missing.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a basic tool description, though it could be more informative. The structure is straightforward but lacks depth.

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?

Given 5 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema, and complex nested objects in the input schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain how to construct filter groups, what properties are available, or what the tool returns. For a search tool with this complexity, more context is needed.

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 parameters are undocumented in the schema. The description mentions 'specific filters' which hints at the 'filterGroups' parameter but doesn't explain the other 4 parameters (properties, limit, after, sorts) or provide any syntax examples. It adds minimal value beyond the parameter names visible in the schema.

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 'Search meetings with specific filters' states the verb ('search') and resource ('meetings'), but it's vague about scope and doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'meetings_list' or 'meetings_get'. It doesn't specify what kind of search this is (e.g., full-text, filtered list, advanced query).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'meetings_list' or 'meetings_get'. The description mentions 'specific filters' but doesn't explain what makes this tool different from other meeting-related tools in the sibling list. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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