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

The description goes well beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by enumerating the exact content returned: when to use, refusals, example, access limits, outputs, provenance, recommended next calls, and the interaction contract. This provides rich behavioral context and reinforces the read-only, guidance-only nature.

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 description is two sentences with zero wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and then densely packs the return categories, making it highly efficient and scannable.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description enumerates all expected return categories in detail, making the tool's behavior fully transparent. For a 1-parameter read-only meta-tool, the description is complete and leaves no critical gaps.

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 the single parameter tool_name as 'Exact tool name from tools/list', and the description reinforces this by telling the user to discover names via tools/list. This adds context beyond the schema, though the schema coverage was already complete.

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 clearly states the tool returns guidance for a single tool visible on the MCP facade, using the verb 'returns' and a specific resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that operate on disaster data by being a meta-tool for tool discovery and guidance.

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 explicitly instructs to call this before using an unfamiliar tool and advises using tools/list to discover tool names. While it doesn't state when not to use it, the guidance is clear and actionable, satisfying the usage context requirement without needing exclusions.

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