get_road_conditionsReturns active road and trail closures for the Sedona / Oak Creek area from the Coconino National Forest alerts page. Also includes highway incidents for SR-89A, SR-179, and I-17 via Road511 when ROAD511_KEY is set.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sources | Yes | ||
| updated | Yes | ||
| closures | Yes | ||
| incidents | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that data comes from external web sources (Coconino alerts, Road511) and that Road511 requires a key, which is useful context beyond annotations.
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 efficient sentences convey the core functionality and an important condition, with no fluff.
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?
With an output schema present, the description adequately covers the input-less tool. It could mention fallback when ROAD511_KEY is missing, but overall it is sufficient.
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?
No parameters exist, and schema description coverage is 100%. Baseline 4 applies as there is no need for additional parameter detail.
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 it returns active road/trail closures for Sedona/Oak Creek and highway incidents from specific routes, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_fire_restrictions or get_hiking_trails.
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 specifies the geographic area and data sources, including the conditional Road511 integration. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use, the scope is well defined.
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.
Tools are mostly distinct across categories (radio, local info, spiritual, listener management), but there is notable overlap: get_emergency_alerts and get_nws_alerts both provide alerts, and get_or_create_listener overlaps with register_listener. Also, get_chakra_frequencies, get_chakra_guide, and get_solfeggio are very similar. While descriptions help differentiate, agents may still struggle to select the right tool.
All tool names consistently use lowercase snake_case with a verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_weather, submit_song_request, log_listener_history). The verbs are predictable (get, search, submit, log, register, update) and there are no deviations like camelCase or inconsistent verb styles.
With 45 tools, the set is overgrown for a radio station server. Many tools are hyper-specific (e.g., separate tools for chakra frequencies, guide, and solfeggio; moon phase, sun times, and stargazing conditions). Consolidating similar functions would reduce cognitive load and improve coherence.
The tool set covers a broad range: radio operations, listener management, local news/weather, outdoor guides, spiritual content, etc. However, there are notable gaps: no tool to fetch full news articles (only headlines), no way to manage show schedules, and no donation or station info tools. Also, listener profile management is split across multiple tools, which feels incomplete.