list_meetings

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

The description explicitly mentions it returns id, title, and date, and orders by most recent first. Since no annotations are provided, this carries the full burden; it implies a read-only operation but does not discuss pagination or limits. However, for a zero-parameter list tool, this is adequate.

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 with 12 words, no redundancy. It front-loads the verb and resource, includes ordering, and no unnecessary information.

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 simplicity (no parameters, output schema exists), the description fully covers the tool's purpose and behavior. It specifies the output fields and ordering, which is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description does not need to add meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 4 applies as per guidelines.

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 action (list), resource (all stored meetings), output fields (id, title, date), and ordering (most recent first), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_meeting (single meeting) and search_meetings (filtered).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_meetings or get_meeting. The description only states what it does without indicating possible use cases or exclusions.

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