get_public_alerts

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It only says the tool returns recent alerts with example categories; it does not disclose filtering semantics, response shape, pagination, locality scope, or whether active_only/language affect 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the core topic efficiently, though it could have traded some examples for parameter or usage context.

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 three optional parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is thin. It gives no return format, default behavior, or interaction with parameters, so an agent cannot confidently predict the tool's exact behavior before calling it.

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 0%, and the description does not mention limit, language, or active_only. It adds nothing beyond a general sense of recency and alert categories, leaving an agent to infer or inspect the schema for parameter meaning.

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 a clear resource (LU-Alert public warnings), with examples of alert types. It is reasonably distinguishable from siblings like get_weather_alerts by the 'public warnings' and food recalls framing, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool instead of get_weather_alerts or other alert/data tools. The word 'recent' implies recency selection, but no conditions, exclusions, or alternatives are provided.

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