List meetings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose ordering ('newest first') and timestamp units ('unix seconds'), which is real behavioral value. It omits pagination/result-limit behavior and any auth or permission context, so it is not fully self-sufficient.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the scope, then the return contract, then the follow-up action. Nothing is padded or repeated.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description correctly compensates by enumerating returned fields, their units, and sort order. Only pagination/result-size behavior is left unstated, which is a minor gap for a zero-param read 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?

The schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description usefully documents the returned field set (id, title, emoji, sources_count, updated_at), which is beyond anything the empty input schema conveys.

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 ('List every meeting in the user's Roomtone account') and reconciles the name/title mismatch between 'notebooks' and 'meetings'. It distinguishes itself from get_notebook by being the bulk enumerator, but never names the sibling tools it feeds.

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?

'Use the returned id with the other tools' gives a clear downstream entry-point role, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not guidance and no alternative named (e.g. get_notebook for a single item). Usage is only implied.

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