Get participants

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes this as a non-destructive read, and the description does not contradict it. The description adds a little context by noting that participants are 'detected' and listing output fields, but it does not disclose more behavioral traits such as auth requirements, empty-result behavior, or rate limits.

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 one compact, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant explanation. It efficiently conveys the resource and expected output fields.

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 tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, so the listed field names provide basic context. Still, the meaning of bot_id, the notion of 'detected', and the structure or statuses of the returned participants are not explained, leaving minor but real gaps.

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%, and the description does not explain what bot_id represents or how it relates to the meeting participants. The sole parameter is left completely to inference from its name, so the description adds no semantic value beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: retrieving participants detected in the meeting, and enumerates the returned fields (displayName, fullName, status, stream ids). It is clearly distinct from sibling tools such as get_transcript, get_chats, or get_bot_detail, which concern different resources.

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 'Participants detected in the meeting' implicitly signals that this tool should be used when the caller needs the participant list for a meeting. However, it provides no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions or conditions.

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