Listar reuniões e decisões

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine behavior beyond that: results are truncated to the `limite` most recent matches while `total` counts all matching meetings, which is exactly the kind of truncation disclosure an agent needs.

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 paragraphs, zero filler. The returned fields are named first, then the truncation/pagination rule, then the fallback advice — properly front-loaded.

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 needn't be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description supplies the one non-obvious thing (most-recent truncation with `total` for full count); only explicit sibling routing 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?

Schema coverage is 75% and already documents date formats and the enum values for `decisao`. The description still adds meaning: `limite` selects the most recent N (not an arbitrary N) and the date bounds are the correct lever for older data, going beyond the schema's bare 'Máximo de reuniões, as mais recentes'.

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 and resource ('Lista reuniões do Copom') and even names the payload fields returned (meta Selic antes/depois and the decision). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like buscar_atas or analise_reuniao, so it falls short of a 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?

It gives real operational guidance — use `desde`/`ate` rather than inflating `limite` for old periods — which tells the agent how to navigate the result window. However, it never says when to use this tool instead of buscar_atas, ler_ata or analise_reuniao, so sibling routing is left to inference.

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