get_meeting_notes

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description's claim of 'Get' aligns with these. However, no additional behavioral context (e.g., what happens if no meeting notes exist, authorization needs) is disclosed beyond the annotations.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word is essential, with no redundant 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?

The description is minimal and does not address important context such as the prerequisite that the video must be linked to a Confluence page, or the expected behavior when no meeting notes exist. Given the tool has an output schema, the return type may be inferred, but the description could do more to inform usage.

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 for the single parameter 'video_id' is 100%, with a description that already explains it is the Loom video ID. The tool's description adds no further semantic meaning about the parameter; it only restates the link to Loom. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's purpose: retrieve a Confluence meeting notes URL linked to a Loom video. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and describes the unique resource, distinguishing it from siblings like get_comments or get_confluence_pages.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_confluence_pages or other get_* tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or context for when this tool is appropriate.

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