응급 모드 활성화

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (write operation) and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: it activates emergency mode, triggers movement, sends alerts, and starts monitoring. No contradictions with 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 somewhat long but well-structured with sections: purpose, action list, args, returns, example. It is front-loaded with the main action, and each sentence adds value, though it could be slightly more concise.

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?

All 7 parameters are fully described, and despite no output schema, the description lists return values (session info, deep link, alert result, monitoring info, tips). Given the context signals (no enums, no nested objects), the description is complete and informative.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds extra value by explaining each parameter in detail (e.g., hospital_id sourced from search results, notify_guardians default true) and providing examples, raising the score.

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 '응급 모드를 활성화합니다' (activates emergency mode) and details specific actions: starting hospital movement, sending KakaoTalk alert, and beginning real-time bed monitoring. It is distinct from sibling tools like lifeguard_search_emergency (search) and lifeguard_get_status (status check).

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 specifies that this tool should be called after selecting a hospital from lifeguard_search_emergency, providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly state when not to use or alternatives, but the context is sufficient.

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