meetings_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('Search') without mentioning permissions, rate limits, pagination behavior, or what happens when no results are found. For a search tool with complex parameters, this is a significant gap in behavioral context.

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 extremely concise with just 5 words, front-loaded with the core action. There's zero wasted language, though this brevity comes at the cost of completeness. Every word earns its place in conveying the basic purpose.

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 the complexity (5 parameters with nested structures, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema), the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain parameter usage, return values, behavioral constraints, or how this differs from sibling tools. For a search tool with this level of complexity, the description provides minimal useful 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 0%, meaning none of the 5 parameters are documented in the schema. The description mentions 'specific filters' but doesn't explain any parameters like 'filterGroups', 'properties', 'limit', 'after', or 'sorts'. It fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 'Search meetings with specific filters' clearly states the verb ('Search') and resource ('meetings'), but it's vague about scope and doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'meetings_list' or 'meetings_get'. It lacks specificity about what kind of search this performs compared to alternatives.

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 like 'meetings_list' or 'meetings_get'. The description mentions 'specific filters' but doesn't explain what scenarios warrant this search tool over simpler listing tools, leaving the agent with no usage context.

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