list_meetings

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds useful behaviors: the data is derived from the workspace feed, rescheduled meetings show their latest time, and results are sorted by start. This gives an agent expectations about freshness and ordering without contradicting the annotation.

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 short sentences pack in the resource, output fields, data source, rescheduling behavior, and sort order with no filler. Key information is front-loaded and every clause earns its place.

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 list tool with a read-only annotation, the description conveys what the tool returns, the source and freshness, and ordering, which is nearly complete. It omits minor details such as pagination or whether past meetings are included, but nothing critical is missing for correct 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 input schema already provides 100% parameter descriptions, including the workspace_id origin note. The description adds context that the workspace feed is the source, but it does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond confirming the meeting fields.

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 a specific verb and resource: listing scheduled meetings within a workspace, with concrete examples (consultations, Zoom calls, walkthroughs) and the returned fields. This distinguishes it from sibling list_* tools by resource type, even though no dedicated meeting getter/sibling exists.

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 implies the tool is used to retrieve scheduled meetings for a workspace by referencing workspace scope and the workspace feed, but it does not contrast it with alternatives or state conditions like 'use list_projects first to obtain workspace_id.' There is no explicit when-to-use guidance beyond the noun phrase.

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