get_event_severity

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

Discloses that it is a paid endpoint, enriched responses include industry_classification fields, and returns a 402 challenge in default non-settling mode. This adds useful context beyond the input schema, though it omits describing the basic severity output.

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?

Two sentences, no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the wrapper nature and then details. Could be slightly more concise but effective.

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?

Given the simple input and lack of output schema, the description covers the paid nature, enriched fields, and a potential error response. However, it does not explain the standard return value (e.g., severity level) or what 'default non-settling mode' means, leaving some gaps.

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 100% for the only parameter (id). The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema's 'Event identifier accepted by the hosted API.'

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 states it retrieves severity for an event via a thin wrapper for GET /events/:id/severity. The verb and resource are clear, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_event_company_intel or get_event_timeline.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions it's a paid endpoint and the response behavior, but does not specify prerequisites or use cases.

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