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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/idempotent safety. The description adds the data source (GDACS) and clarifies the filtering dimensions, which supplements the annotations with useful context. No contradictions.

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?

A single, information-dense sentence that front-loads the core purpose and then lists filters. No wasted words; every clause adds value.

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 a rich annotation set and output schema present, the description covers the essential behavior and filters. It could mention that all parameters are optional or how results are ordered, but these are minor given the schema and annotations.

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 expands event_type codes to full disaster names (earthquake, tropical cyclone, etc.), which the schema does not explain. It also specifies 'ISO' for date formatting and ISO3 for country code, adding meaning beyond the schema's terse descriptions.

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 verb ('Search and list') and resource ('GDACS global disaster events') with filtering dimensions. It clearly distinguishes from the singular sibling tool 'event' by emphasizing the list/search nature.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use the tool: searching and listing events with optional filters. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., 'for single event details, use event'), but the scope is unambiguous.

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