get_meeting_type

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

No annotations provided; description implies read-only behavior ('Get'), but does not explicitly state no side effects, auth needs, or that the meeting type must exist. Adequate but not explicit.

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?

Single sentence, no fluff, efficiently lists example config fields. Front-loaded with verb and resource. Optimal length.

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?

For a simple get tool with one parameter and no output schema, description conveys purpose and return scope. Minor gap: does not mention need for valid ID or handle errors, but overall adequate.

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 coverage is 0%; description does not explain the 'meeting_type_id' parameter beyond the schema. Parameter meaning is implied by context but not specified, failing to compensate for low schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get full config of a single meeting type' with specific resource and action, listing config aspects (branding, CSS mode, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_meeting_types (list all) and update_meeting_type.

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?

Implies usage when needing detailed config of one meeting type, but no explicit when-not or alternatives to siblings like list_meeting_types. Lacks guidance on context or prerequisites.

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