meetings_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'search' but doesn't describe whether this is read-only, has side effects, requires permissions, has rate limits, or what the output looks like. For a search tool with complex parameters and no annotations, this is a critical gap in transparency.

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 extremely concise - a single 5-word sentence. While this may be too brief for adequate tool understanding, it's perfectly structured with zero wasted words. Every word ('Search meetings with specific filters') contributes directly to the tool's purpose.

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 complexity (5 parameters with nested objects, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema), the description is completely inadequate. A search tool with complex filtering, sorting, pagination, and property selection requires much more explanation about parameter usage, expected behavior, and output format.

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 0%, so the schema provides no parameter documentation. The description mentions 'specific filters' which hints at the 'filterGroups' parameter but doesn't explain any of the 5 parameters (filterGroups, properties, limit, after, sorts) or their purposes. It adds minimal value beyond the parameter names visible in the schema.

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 'Search meetings with specific filters' states a vague purpose - it mentions the verb 'search' and resource 'meetings' but lacks specificity about what kind of meetings or what search capabilities exist. It doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'meetings_list' or 'meetings_get', which likely serve different purposes. The description is better than a tautology but remains too generic.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling list includes 'meetings_list' and 'meetings_get', but the description doesn't explain when filtering/searching is needed versus simple listing or retrieval. There's no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions for usage.

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