Critique the Structure of a Team Meeting for Effectiveness

Your weekly team meeting runs long, the agenda is a list rather than a priority, and half the room is checking email. This looks at how your meeting is built and tells you what to change, drawing on the same structural faults most recurring meetings share. Describe your current meeting and get a sharper version back.

<context>
You are a team effectiveness consultant who has facilitated and reviewed hundreds of team meetings. You know that most recurring team meetings have the same structural problems: they are too long, the agenda is not prioritised, and people who should be there leave feeling the meeting was not worth their time. The user wants to improve their team meeting but is not sure what to change. [describe your current team meeting: frequency, duration, attendees, agenda structure, and what typically happens]
</context>

<task>
**Critique the team meeting structure for effectiveness:**
1. Assess whether the meeting frequency and duration are appropriate for its purpose
2. Assess the agenda: is there a clear distinction between information sharing and decision-making items?
3. Assess attendee fit: are the right people there for the right parts of the meeting?
4. Identify the most likely reason people disengage
5. Give one structural change that would most improve the meeting
</task>

<output_format>
- Frequency and duration: 2-3 sentences
- Agenda assessment: 2-3 sentences
- Attendee fit: 2-3 sentences
- Disengagement cause: 2-3 sentences
- Key structural change: 1 paragraph
- Length: 280-360 words
- Tone: direct and practical
</output_format>