gangtise_summary_list

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions filtering but omits pagination behavior, performance implications (though fetchAll has a caution in schema), and whether the operation is read-only. The date header adds context but not behavioral traits.

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 main description is a single sentence, which is concise and front-loads the purpose. However, it could be better organized (e.g., bullet points for filter types) to improve scanability. The date header is an external note, not part of the core description.

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 15 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format, pagination defaults (size=20), or how to handle large result sets (fetchAll note is in schema but not description). The tool's complexity requires more context for effective use.

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 67%, so many parameters have descriptions. The tool's description adds minimal value beyond the schema: it lists filter categories but doesn't explain parameter relationships (e.g., how searchType interacts with keyword). Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does moderate work.

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 it queries a list of meeting minutes (会议纪要列表) and lists types (业绩会, 路演, 专家访谈, 调研纪要), making the resource specific. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like gangtise_roadshow_list or gangtise_research_list, which also deal with meetings or reports.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus other list tools (e.g., gangtise_announcement_list, gangtise_research_list), nor does it specify prerequisite conditions or alternatives.

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