get_vote_meets

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral details. It only states the action without mentioning side effects, permissions, pagination behavior, or output format. The lack of any such information leaves the agent uncertain about the tool's runtime characteristics.

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 with no redundancy. It directly conveys the tool's purpose without unnecessary details, making it efficiently scannable.

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 has an output schema (as indicated), so return value explanation is not required. However, the description lacks contextual information such as typical use cases or relationship to other tools, which would enhance completeness. Given the simplicity of the operation, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Although the description does not elaborate on parameters, the input schema provides detailed descriptions for all 14 parameters, achieving 100% coverage. Since schema coverage is high, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate; the description adds no extra semantic value.

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 function: retrieving the list of meetings for a specific vote. It uses a specific verb ('取得' / get) and resource ('特定表決所屬的會議' / meetings belonging to a specific vote), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_vote or list_meets.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as get_vote, list_votes, or get_meet. It does not mention use cases, filtering preferences, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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