Get disaster statistics aggregated by event type and alert level for a specified time period.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| toDate | No | End date for statistics period | |
| country | No | Country filter | |
| fromDate | No | Start date for statistics period | |
| alertLevel | No | Alert level filter | |
| eventTypes | No | Comma-separated event types to include |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only restates the grouping dimensions without adding behavioral context such as return format, whether it includes empty groups, or any limitations. The description adds no information beyond what the tool name and schema already convey.
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 concise sentence that is front-loaded with the verb 'Get' and contains no redundant information. Every word 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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain the return structure or data shape. It does not specify what 'disaster statistics' includes (e.g., counts, totals, per-group breakdowns). Given the tool's moderate complexity (5 optional parameters), this is a significant gap.
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% with individual parameter descriptions, but the tool description adds meaning by clarifying the relationship: eventTypes and alertLevel are aggregation dimensions, and fromDate/toDate define the time period. This synthesizes the parameters into a coherent purpose, exceeding 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Get disaster statistics aggregated by event type and alert level for a specified time period.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the aggregation dimensions (event type, alert level, time period) distinguish it from siblings like search_events or get_active_disasters.
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 implies usage for aggregated statistics but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. Sibling tool names suggest alternatives, but no direct comparison or 'use instead' guidance is given.
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.
