unifi_get_alerts

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

With no annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint) provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'get' (read operation) but does not elaborate on what 'recent' means (e.g., time window), pagination behavior, or whether results are filtered by site or user. No side effects or authorization requirements are mentioned.

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 a single short sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and is easy to parse.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate. However, it lacks details such as the time range for 'recent' alerts, event categories, and whether alerts are system-wide or per-site. These would improve completeness without bloating the description.

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 input schema covers the single 'limit' parameter with full description (100% schema coverage). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Get recent system alerts and events' clearly states the action (get) and resource (recent system alerts and events). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools that operate on other resources (e.g., devices, clients). However, it does not further differentiate from other 'get' tools that might also cover alerts, but the resource name is distinct enough.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like unifi_get_system_health or unifi_get_network_stats. It lacks context such as prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name.

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