get_eventFetch a single event by EONET id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| event_id | Yes | EONET event id (e.g. "EONET_6210") |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | EONET event id | |
| link | No | Event link | |
| title | No | Event title | |
| closed | No | Closed date or null if open | |
| sources | No | Event sources | |
| geometry | No | Geographic coordinates | |
| categories | No | Event categories | |
| description | No | Event description |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / properties / description / typePrevious value: -"string"New value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "event_id": "EONET_6210"
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "categories": {
+ "description": "Event categories",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Category id",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "title": {
+ "description": "Category title",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "closed": {
+ "description": "Closed date or null if open",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "description": {
+ "description": "Event description",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "geometry": {
+ "description": "Geographic coordinates",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "coordinates": {
+ "description": "GeoJSON coordinates",
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "date": {
+ "description": "Observation date",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": {
+ "description": "Geometry type",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "description": "EONET event id",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "link": {
+ "description": "Event link",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "sources": {
+ "description": "Event sources",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Source id",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "url": {
+ "description": "Source URL",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "title": {
+ "description": "Event title",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safe read profile is well covered. The description adds no extra behavioral context such as error conditions or external lookups, so it provides minimal value 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the tool's purpose.
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 tool with a required event_id, an example, an output schema, and strong annotations, the description is fully sufficient to guide 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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents the event_id parameter. The description repeats the notion of 'EONET id' but does not add meaningful semantics beyond what the schema provides.
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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and a specific resource ('a single event by EONET id'). It clearly contrasts with the sibling tool 'events' by emphasizing 'single', so an agent can distinguish them.
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 clear context: use this tool when you have a specific EONET id and need one event. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the 'single event by id' framing is enough to imply when it applies.
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.