get_packFree discovery. Returns detailed metadata, coverage, freshness, preferred canonical tool guidance, and first-query examples for one pack. Call this before querying a new pack so you can see time shape, coverage limits, and the paste-ready first query.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pack_id | Yes | Pack identifier from get_catalog. Newly catalog-admitted packs require no MCP schema change. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by enumerating what the tool exposes (metadata, coverage, freshness, canonical tool guidance, first-query examples) and the practical benefit ('time shape, coverage limits, and the paste-ready first query'). This explains the output's role without contradicting the read-only annotation.
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?
Two sentences with zero redundancy. The first sentence front-loads the purpose and output contents; the second delivers actionable usage guidance. Every word earns its place.
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?
For a single-parameter, read-only discovery tool with no output schema, the description fully specifies what the agent receives (the enumerated output elements) and when to call it. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.
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 schema already documents pack_id completely with 100% coverage, including its source (get_catalog) and a note about catalog-admitted packs. The description does not add any additional meaning about the parameter itself, so per the baseline for high schema coverage, a score 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 states a specific action ('Returns detailed metadata, coverage, freshness, preferred canonical tool guidance, and first-query examples') targeting a distinct resource ('one pack'). It explicitly frames this as 'Free discovery,' which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like query_dataset or get_catalog by its discovery-oriented purpose.
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 provides an explicit when-to-use instruction: 'Call this before querying a new pack.' This is a clear situational trigger. It does not mention when not to use it or name specific alternatives, but the guidance is unambiguous and actionable for an agent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
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.
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.
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.
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.