list_recent_meetings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and succeeds: it discloses newest-first ordering, the 1–90 day range with clamping, the effect of only_with_transcripts, the three possible transcript_status values, and the failure consequence of calling get_transcript on unavailable meetings.

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 well-structured: a behavior-focused opening paragraph, then a clear Args section. Every sentence adds necessary operational information, with no redundancy 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?

Despite having no output schema and no annotations, the description provides enough for an agent to decide when to call the tool, how to set parameters, how to interpret transcript_status, and how to interact with the closely related get_transcript tool. The main usage loop is fully covered.

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 input schema provides no descriptions (0% coverage), but the description fully compensates: 'days' is defined as how many days back to look with a 1–90 clamped range, and 'only_with_transcripts' is defined as omitting meetings marked unavailable. Both parameters are meaningfully explained.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List recent Teams meetings on your calendar (newest first).' It also names the key output field, transcript_status, and clearly separates this listing tool from the sibling get_transcript tool.

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?

The description explicitly tells the agent when to call get_transcript (only for available or unknown transcript_status) and when not to (unavailable, where the call will fail). It also instructs the agent not to claim a transcript exists unless status is available, which is actionable routing guidance for alternatives.

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