I would add a detailed statement of author contribution. The CRediT taxonomy does include specific roles for administration, conception/design, and supervision. Based on your comments I don't think there is necessarily any question that you made a worthy contribution to the paper.
With that in mind, I agree with @user438383's answer in general. The ICJME provides really good, clear guidelines. But, and this is a big but, the real world often requires flexibility and ICJME is the not the be all and end all of authorship criteria. In terms of authorship contribution, weekly meetings where you supervise, mentor, or otherwise directly guide the progress of a project is (in my opinion) a reasonable contribution to be named author. This is essentially what PhD supervisors do and I doubt anyone would suggest eliminating them from an author list. I find it impossible to believe that you made NO significant contributions to the paper with such a level of involvement. I'm also assuming that you reviewed the manuscript and approved the final draft. If you have not, you should. There is still time to do so since obviously you have not submitted the paper yet.
I also think it is worth mentioning that from the ICJME's website:
The criteria are not intended for use as a means to disqualify colleagues from authorship who otherwise meet authorship criteria by denying them the opportunity to meet criterion #s 2 or 3. Therefore, all individuals who meet the first criterion should have the opportunity to participate in the review, drafting, and final approval of the manuscript.