Get currently active disasters. Returns events with their geographic footprints grouped by disaster type.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| eventTypes | No | Optional: semicolon-separated event types to filter (e.g., 'EQ;TC;FL') |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavior on its own. It states that the tool returns events with geographic footprints grouped by disaster type, which gives useful behavioral context, but does not explain how 'active' is defined or how filtering (eventTypes) affects results.
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 immediately states the tool's purpose and return information. No wasted words or repetition of schema details.
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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains what it returns (events with geographic footprints grouped by type). It lacks detail on edge cases or definition of 'active', but this is minor for the tool's simplicity.
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 schema covers 100% of parameter descriptions (eventTypes already explained in the input schema). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 ('Get') and resource ('currently active disasters'), clearly distinguishing from siblings like get_recent_alerts or search_events by focusing on active status and geographic footprints grouped by disaster type.
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 phrase 'currently active' provides clear context for when to use this tool, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. No explicit 'when to use vs other tools' guidance, but the active-disaster scope is unambiguous.
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.
Most tools are clearly distinct: get_event_data retrieves a single event, search_events lists events with filters, and reference tools like get_alert_level_info and get_event_types are obviously different. However, get_active_disasters, get_recent_alerts, and search_events have some overlap in returning lists of events, though their descriptions clarify the specific time-based or filter-based focus.
Seven of eight tools follow a consistent get_<noun> pattern (get_active_disasters, get_event_data, etc.), making them predictable. The single deviation is search_events, which omits the 'get_' prefix but still uses a clear verb-noun structure.
With 8 tools, the set is well-scoped for a disaster information API. Each tool serves a distinct query purpose—reference data, single-event details, list queries, and statistics—without unnecessary redundancy or bloat.
The tool surface covers the core read-only operations expected for this domain: listing active/recent events, searching with filters, fetching details, retrieving by country, and accessing reference data (alert levels, event types) plus statistics. There are no obvious dead ends or missing operations for a query-focused API.
