Identify named flood events in FEMA claims data and see how many claims each event generated. Use this summary to compare event activity and guide further analysis.
List the distinct named flood events present in the claims data (e.g. 'Hurricane Katrina', 'Tropical Storm Allison'), with claim counts.
Returns: A dict mapping each flood event name to its claim count.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that results are grouped by distinct event names and returns a dict mapping names to claim counts. It does not mention ordering, potential size of the result, or that the operation is read-only, though 'List' implies it.
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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and the Returns line adds useful output structure without redundancy. 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 zero-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description is sufficient: it states what the tool lists, gives concrete examples, and specifies the exact return shape. An agent can call it correctly without additional information.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter burden for the description to carry. The baseline of 4 applies because no additional parameter explanation is needed.
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 ('List') and a precise resource ('distinct named flood events') while adding that claim counts are included. It clearly distinguishes this aggregation tool from the sibling tools that fetch individual claims or summaries.
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 intended use is implied: call this when you need the distinct named flood events and their claim counts. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over search_claims or claims_summary, nor any exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.