Get Volcanic Activity

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., rate limits, authentication, data freshness, or whether results are paginated). The 'free tool' note is minor and does not substantively expand transparency beyond the 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?

The description is two short sentences, front-loading the main purpose. No filler or redundancy. However, the first sentence 'Free tool' could be integrated elsewhere or omitted, but overall it is concise and to the point.

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 tool's complexity (6 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description is notably sparse. It does not explain how to structure filters, what metric IDs are valid, or what the response format looks like. More completeness would be needed for an agent to use it effectively without external context.

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 the structured schema already documents all 6 parameters. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'such as VEI' for the metrics array, but it does not clarify filter structure, sort options, or output controls beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is 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?

The description clearly states it queries a specific resource (volcanoes_events) for eruption records and volcanic metrics like VEI. The verb 'queries' is appropriate, and it distinguishes from sibling tools such as get_live_volcano_events which likely focus on real-time 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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_live_volcano_events or get_earthquake_events. The description only mentions it's a 'free tool' but does not clarify filtering scope, time ranges, or comparison conditions that would help an agent choose appropriately.

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