get_official_emergency_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld=false/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower, yet the description still adds real context: the data is 'bundled' (local, not fetched) and carries 'provenance'. It does not say how current the reference is or how large the bundle is, but the key behavioral contract is stated.

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?

A single compact clause pair with the resource first and the behavioral guarantee second; no wasted words. Nothing is buried, though the sentence is terse enough that one more clause about contents could be added without bloat.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should indicate what comes back; 'official India reference with provenance' signals sourced reference data but not its shape (emergency numbers, contacts, categories). Adequate for triggering the tool, thin for predicting the result.

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?

Only one parameter with 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate; mentioning 'India' matches the schema's country const 'IN' and effectively explains why the argument is fixed. It never names the parameter or states that only India is supported, leaving that to the const keyword.

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 concrete verb and resource ('show bundled official India reference') and adds a scoping trait ('never contacts any service') that separates it from the network-touching siblings like send_trusted_message. It does not explicitly say 'emergency information', so the agent leans on the tool name to fill that in.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no sibling is named as an alternative. The 'never contacts any service' clause implies offline, static lookup, but the agent must infer the selection condition itself.

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