Get Traffic Incidents

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 usefully discloses that only active disturbances are returned and what fields accompany them (severity, location, time), which helps set expectations. However, it omits permissions, rate limits, pagination behavior, and any note that this is a non-mutating read.

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?

Three tight sentences with zero filler: purpose first, then return content, then filtering options. Front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema and three well-documented parameters, the description covers purpose, return content, and filters adequately. It could mention the default limit/pagination behavior, but otherwise an agent has what it needs to call this correctly.

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%, so all three parameters (limit, county, roadNumber) are already documented in the schema. The description reiterates the road number and county filters but adds no format or syntax detail beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (traffic situations), enumerates exactly what it covers (accidents, roadwork, closures, incidents), and scopes it geographically to Sweden. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_traffic_flow and get_road_conditions, which cover different data.

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 notes it 'can be filtered by road number or county,' giving some usage context, but never states when to prefer this tool over get_traffic_flow or get_road_conditions, nor any prerequisites. Usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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