Create Meeting

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, destructive-capable operation. The description adds valuable context: calendar invites are not sent by default, and the flag to change that behavior. It also notes the return value (compact meeting summary). This goes beyond the structured fields.

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 sentences, each earning its place: creation statement, required fields, and crucial ID resolution/calendar behavior. No fluff, clear structure.

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 24-param schema and 6 required params, the description focuses on the essentials: required fields, ID resolution, and the calendar invite default. It doesn't mention optional params, but the schema covers them. The note about the return summary is a nice touch. Slightly more could be said about the meaning of openWorldHint or related_to constraints, but it's sufficient.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra guidance on resolving IDs for meeting_type_id and owner_id, and clarifies the default behavior of do_not_send_calendar_invites. This pushes it above baseline without needing to enumerate all parameters.

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 'Creates one Recruit CRM meeting' – a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like search_meetings and update_meeting by focusing on creation. No ambiguity.

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?

Explicitly lists required parameters and directs the agent to resolve IDs via list_meeting_types and list_users. It also explains when to set do_not_send_calendar_invites to false. However, it doesn't explicitly mention update_meeting as the alternative for modifying existing meetings, so it stops short of full when-not guidance.

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