list-meeting-attendance-records

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying the kind of data returned—who joined, when, and for how long—which matters because there is no output schema.

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?

One compact sentence conveys purpose and key output semantics without redundancy. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource and contains no filler or repetition of the tool name.

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 listing tool, the description plus a fully documented schema and strong annotations cover the essentials. It does not explicitly explain how to obtain meetingId/reportId or mention sibling alternatives, but the required inputs are obvious from the schema and the description provides enough output context.

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%, and the schema already documents all parameters including cursor and maxItems pagination behavior. The description adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond framing the records as belonging to an attendance report, so the baseline of 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?

Description states a specific verb ('List'), a resource ('attendance records'), and clarifies the scope ('of an attendance report') with useful output details (who joined, when, for how long). This distinguishes it from the sibling list-meeting-attendance-reports, which lists reports rather than the records inside a report.

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 phrase 'of an attendance report' implies that meetingId and reportId are needed and that the caller should already have an attendance report. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over list-meeting-attendance-reports or related meeting tools, so usage is mostly implied rather than stated.

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