swapcard_list_meetings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It reveals that the operation is a list with optional filters and cursor pagination, but it does not mention response format, authentication requirements, default page size, or any notable behavior beyond the basic read operation.

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 entire description is one efficient, front-loaded sentence. It states the core purpose and the two main enhancement areas without filler, making it easy to scan.

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 five-parameter list tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is functional but lean. It covers the query inputs and pagination concept, yet omits return value shape, pagination mechanics, and any operational caveats, so it is not fully self-sufficient.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It groups the parameters meaningfully: 'ID filters' maps to ids, 'date filters' to lastUpdatedSince, and 'cursor pagination' to after/first, plus the required eventId. This adds valuable context, though individual parameter formats are not detailed.

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 identifies the action ('List'), the resource ('meetings'), and the scope ('in an event'), while also mentioning key capabilities (ID/date filters and cursor pagination). It reads distinctly from sibling tools like list_sessions or list_exhibitors.

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 description implies the tool is for retrieving meetings with filtering/pagination, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose it over alternatives such as list_sessions or list_event_people. There are no exclusions or alternative tool references.

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