Real-time earthquake data from USGS. Filter by time period, minimum magnitude, and proximity to a location.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| period | No | Time period: hour, day, week, month, significant_month (default: week) | |
| latitude | No | Filter near this latitude | |
| longitude | No | Filter near this longitude | |
| radius_km | No | Search radius in km (default: 500) | |
| min_magnitude | No | Minimum magnitude (default: 4.5) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the data source (USGS) and real-time nature, but doesn't specify pagination, response format, or rate limits. The lack of destructive side effects is implied by 'data', meeting a baseline level.
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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose and key filters with zero 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?
The tool has 5 optional parameters and no output schema, so the description should explain what data is returned. It doesn't, leaving a gap in understanding the service's response structure. Still, for a simple data fetch, it's minimally adequate.
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 coverage is 100%, providing baseline 3. The description adds value by synthesizing parameters into three filter dimensions (time period, magnitude, location), making it easier to understand how to invoke the tool.
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 identifies the tool as providing real-time earthquake data from USGS, distinguishing it from weather or health-related siblings. However, it lacks an explicit action verb, stating a noun phrase rather than 'fetch' or 'query'.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs siblings like natcat_live or weather_risk. The description only states what it does, not the appropriate context or exclusions.
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.