meet_export_minutes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the filesystem side effect (writes local documents to the exports directory) and adds useful format traits (HTML is print/PDF ready, JSON is structured). However, it omits what happens when a session has no synthesized minutes, overwrite behavior, and auth prerequisites.

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, front-loaded sentence with the verb 'Exports' leading. Every clause earns its place: resource, three formats with useful traits, and the destination. There is no repetition of schema fields or filler.

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 two-parameter tool with an output schema covering return values, the description covers the essentials: what is exported, available formats, and where files land. Remaining gaps are moderate given zero annotations and schema descriptions - the unstated prerequisite of meet_synthesize_meeting, exact format string values, and auth/overwrite behavior.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds real meaning to the format parameter by enumerating Markdown/.md, HTML/.html, and JSON/.json, and it scopes session_id to a session whose minutes were synthesized. Yet it never gives the exact accepted string values for format or defines the session lifecycle relationship beyond the adjective 'synthesized.'

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 uses a specific verb and resource combination ('Exports the synthesized meeting minutes') plus concrete output formats and a destination. Among the siblings, none perform exports, so this tool is inherently distinguished from meet_synthesize_meeting (which produces minutes) and the fetch/list tools.

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 context is implied rather than explicit: calling the minutes 'synthesized' signals the prerequisite of meet_synthesize_meeting, but the description never names the sibling, states 'run after synthesis completes,' or mentions auth requirements via meet_check_auth. No exclusions or alternative routing are given.

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