parse-teams-url

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only (readOnlyHint: true). The description adds context by specifying input URL formats and the output type (standard joinWebUrl), which goes beyond the annotation, though it does not detail error behavior or edge cases.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the primary action and efficiently conveys the usage recommendation.

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 (single parameter, no output schema, and clear annotations), the description provides all necessary context: what it does, which URL formats it handles, and when to use it. No additional information is required for proper invocation.

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 only parameter 'url' has a schema description 'Teams meeting URL in any format' that already captures the essence. The tool description adds no extra semantic information beyond the schema, and with 100% schema coverage, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Converts any Teams meeting URL format into a standard joinWebUrl.' It specifies the verb 'converts' and the resource 'Teams meeting URL', and explicitly lists the supported formats, making it distinct from sibling tools that perform different operations.

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 provides explicit guidance: 'Use this before list-online-meetings when the user provides a recap or short URL.' This tells the agent when to invoke the tool, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives beyond that specific context.

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