Find Deaths
get_deathsFinds death records
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | ||
| start | No | ||
| eventyear | No | ||
| eventplace | No | ||
| number_show | No |
get_deathsFinds death records
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | ||
| start | No | ||
| eventyear | No | ||
| eventplace | No | ||
| number_show | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds no additional behavioral details, such as whether results are paginated or how search parameters affect outcomes, so it does not go beyond the 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?
The description is short and to the point, with no extraneous words. However, it is under-specified and does not provide the substance needed for an AI agent to use the tool effectively.
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?
Given the tool has five parameters and no output schema, the description should explain the input requirements and expected results. The one-sentence description omits all of this, making it inadequate for correct invocation.
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 description does not mention any of the five parameters (name, start, eventyear, eventplace, number_show) or how they control the search. With 0% schema description coverage, the description completely fails to compensate for the lack of parameter documentation.
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 that the tool finds death records, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_births and get_marriages. However, it lacks any qualifiers about search scope or filters, making it a clear but minimal statement.
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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or search contexts. It simply states a generic action without contextual cues.
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.