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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds useful context that this is for clients displaying map warnings at a given view zoom, but it does not add further behavioral details such as limits, authentication, or rendering constraints beyond what annotations and schema provide.

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 definition uses two focused sentences: the first front-loads what the tool returns in map-rendering terms, and the second provides the only necessary routing guidance. There is no wasted text.

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 five required parameters, complete schema descriptions, rich annotations, and an output schema. The description supplies the missing conceptual context: that the tool is for map clients drawing warnings over a viewport at a zoom, and points elsewhere for near-place listing.

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%, with each viewport edge and zoom parameter already documented. The description reinforces that the view and zoom matter but does not add syntax or edge-case guidance beyond the schema, so baseline 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 states a specific resource and return shape: official warnings rendered over a map view, including each hazard's edge at each class and its symbols at the view's zoom. It also explicitly distinguishes this tool from get_hazards_near, which lists warnings near a place.

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?

It says the map calls this in clients that display warnings, establishing the map-rendering context, and directly routes place-based listing to get_hazards_near. The when-to-use condition and the alternative are both explicit.

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