Ferry service alerts

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description need not restate safety. It adds domain context about what alerts include and how filtering works, though it does not discuss update frequency or result ordering.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states the alert scope first, then gives the optional-input behavior and a keyword example. Every sentence contributes directly to use of the tool.

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 read-only, two-optional-parameter alert lookup with no output schema, the description supplies enough context: what is returned (affected routes and ports), how filtering works, and what happens with no input. No critical calling detail is missing.

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%, so both parameters are already documented in detail, including city codes and keyword matching behavior. The description reinforces the optional filter behavior with "no input for every alert", but largely duplicates the schema's keyword example rather than adding new parameter semantics.

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 names the specific resource and content type: current ferry service alerts covering suspensions, cancelled/changed sailings, and the affected routes and ports. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling timetable, live-board, and fare tools. An agent can identify the tool's function without inspecting the schema.

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?

It gives concrete usage guidance: filter with a keyword such as "綠島", or omit input to retrieve every alert. It does not explicitly contrast this tool with ferry_timetable or ferry_live_board, but the alert-specific scope is clear.

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