fathom_get_latest_meeting

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and it explicitly states 'Read-only fetch', disclosing non-mutating behavior. It also references the output shape ('same summarized fields as fathom_list_recent_meetings'), which is useful transparency. It does not cover edge cases like no meetings existing, but the core safety profile is clear.

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 one concise sentence that front-loads the action and scope, then adds relevant context. Every phrase earns its place, with no unnecessary fluff.

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 read-only tool with one optional parameter, the description covers purpose, output shape by reference, and the limited scope. It lacks explicit mention of empty-result behavior, but this is a minor gap given the low complexity and full schema coverage.

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%, with the parameter 'recorded_by' already described in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'Read-only fetch of the single most recent Fathom meeting', identifying a specific verb ('fetch') and resource (most recent meeting). It also differentiates from siblings by referencing 'fathom_list_recent_meetings' and specifying 'exactly one meeting'.

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?

It explicitly names the primary use case ('the 90% case for /updateP1') and contrasts with the list tool ('same summarized fields ... for exactly one meeting'), implying when to use this versus the list alternative. It lacks explicit exclusions, but the context is clear.

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