Skip to main content
Glama

DaedalMap Disaster and Geospatial Data

by com.daedalmap

Get Disaster Links For Event

get_disaster_links_for_event
Read-only

Free linked-disaster helper. Resolves one exact disaster event id into its published related-disaster links. Use this only when you already have an exact event id from a supported pack such as earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes, or wildfires.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pack_idNoOptional pack id hint when the event id is ambiguous. Supported exact-event link packs are earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes, and wildfires.
event_idYesExact disaster event id from a supported pack row, such as 'NOAA-SIG-2' or 'USA-CA-FIRE-215'.
request_idNoOptional caller-supplied request id for tracing.
cross_type_onlyNoWhen true, only return cross-hazard links. Default true.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates the tool is read-only. The description adds that it resolves to 'published related-disaster links', but does not disclose other behavioral traits like error handling, pagination, or rate limits. It adds moderate value beyond the annotation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is only two sentences, with the key information in the second sentence. The first sentence ('Free linked-disaster helper') is slightly vague but not harmful. Overall efficient and front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the lack of an output schema, the description could explain return format or behavior for missing IDs. It does not mention optional parameters (pack_id, cross_type_only) or their defaults. The description is adequate but leaves gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema descriptions cover 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not elaborate on parameter meanings or provide examples beyond what the schema already contains, so no added value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states that the tool resolves one exact disaster event ID into published related-disaster links, specifying the verb 'resolves' and the resource 'event id' to 'links'. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like search_disaster_links by requiring an exact ID, but does not explicitly compare.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly advises to use this tool only when an exact event ID from a supported pack is available, providing clear context. It does not list alternative tools or exclusions, but the guidance is sufficient for basic use.

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

All DaedalMap Disaster and Geospatial Data toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct scopes with detailed 'Use this' guidance, but a few pairs like get_disaster_link_chain and get_disaster_links_for_event, or query_dataset versus the specialized get_* event tools, could cause momentary confusion. Overall, descriptions mitigate overlap well.

Naming Consistency4/5

The majority follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (check_, compare_, convert_, create_, estimate_, get_, list_, resolve_). Minor exceptions like loc_id_info and query_dataset are acceptable but break the pattern slightly.

Tool Count3/5

28 tools exceed the preferred range, but the broad domain spanning disasters, geospatial geometry, reference conversion, and export jobs justifies many of them. Still, the count feels heavy and might overwhelm agents.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface is remarkably comprehensive: discovery (catalog, pack, geometry catalog), resolution (point, reference, scope), geometry (check, get, compare), conversion (quote, create, status), and disaster events for multiple types. No critical dead ends for the stated domain.

Resources