List Meeting Recordings

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

Annotations already declare this is a safe read-only operation, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds useful behavioral context by saying results are sorted by session number and that each recording represents one bot session with transcript, status, and metadata.

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 three short sentences with the core scope front-loaded. Every sentence adds useful information about scope, ordering, or recording structure.

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?

With full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description provides enough context to call the tool correctly. It could mention pagination behavior, but that is already covered by the schema and is not essential for selection.

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%, so the schema already documents all five parameters, including pagination and include/fields options. The description only reinforces the required incident scope and does not add parameter-level detail 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: listing meeting recording sessions for an incident. The incident scope helps distinguish it from the broader sibling list_all_meeting_recordings, though it does not explicitly name that alternative.

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?

Usage is implied by 'for an incident,' which tells the agent this is the incident-scoped listing tool. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this versus list_all_meeting_recordings, get_meeting_recording, or get_incident_meeting_transcripts.

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