summarize_meetings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It describes the return as meetings with notes and attendees, but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or non-destructive. Sufficient but not detailed.

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 concise summary sentence, usage guideline, bullet-like parameter explanations, and a return description. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential inputs (time period, person filter) and output. It could mention that summaries are generated from notes, but overall it is complete for effective use.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the date parameters (YYYY-MM-DD format, convenience of days) and person filtering. It clarifies the mutual exclusivity of date_from/date_to vs days. The 'ctx' parameter is not fully described, but it is standard.

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 clearly states 'Get meeting summaries with notes for a time period', specifying the verb, resource, and scope. It distinctly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_meetings, get_meeting, and search_meetings.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when asked to summarize, recap, or review meetings over a period', giving clear context for when to invoke. It lacks explicit exclusions or alternative tool references, but the guidance is straightforward.

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