write_summary_to_obsidian

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose side effects, but it only says 'append' without clarifying reversibility, required permissions, or what happens if no matching note exists. The matching logic is a helpful behavioral detail, but the tool's mutation aspect and potential failure modes are not addressed.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action, and includes a concrete example. Every word adds value, with no redundant phrasing or unnecessary details.

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 description covers the core functionality and matching rule, but given the absence of an output schema and annotations, it omits key context such as prerequisites (e.g., zoom_login), error behavior if no matching note exists, and how the summary is formatted. It is adequate but not fully complete for a tool with side effects.

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?

The input schema already provides a full description for the single parameter meeting_id ('The numeric Zoom meeting ID'), reaching 100% coverage. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool fetches a Zoom meeting summary and appends it to a person's note in Obsidian. It includes the specific matching logic ('matching the first name in the meeting topic') and gives an example, which differentiates it from siblings like get_meeting_summary (which only fetches) and write_all_summaries_to_obsidian (which writes all).

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 explains what the tool does but does not explicitly say when to use it versus alternatives. The behavior is implied as a single-meeting operation, but there is no direct mention that write_all_summaries_to_obsidian should be used for bulk processing or that get_meeting_summary should be used if only fetching is needed.

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