PHIVOLCS earthquake bulletin

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully disclosed. The description adds 'full bulletin' but doesn't elaborate on behavior such as error handling or content details, which is acceptable given the read-only nature and existing annotations.

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?

One sentence, zero waste. It communicates the tool's purpose and scope efficiently.

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 simple fetch-by-URL tool with one parameter, an output schema, and strong annotations, the definition is sufficient. The workflow linking to get_latest_earthquakes is clear, though the description doesn't mention what the full bulletin contains.

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 coverage is 100%, and the bulletin_url parameter is well-described as the output of get_latest_earthquakes, so the schema carries the semantic weight. The main description adds no additional param guidance, maintaining the baseline for high coverage.

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 resource ('full bulletin') and scopes it to 'PHIVOLCS earthquake event', clearly distinguishing it from the list-oriented get_latest_earthquakes and the USGS-based sibling tool.

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 alone implies usage for a specific event, but the schema parameter description explicitly states the bulletin_url must be the full URL returned by get_latest_earthquakes, establishing a clear workflow. It doesn't name alternatives or exclusions, but the coupling with get_latest_earthquakes provides sufficient context for correct selection.

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