unifi_list_port_forwards

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

Without annotations, the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination (though schema does), read-only nature, or whether 'all' means across sites. The description is too minimal to adequately inform the agent.

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 very concise (4 words), but lacks structure or front-loading of key information. It is not verbose, but also not optimally organized for an agent to quickly grasp usage.

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 three parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, limitations, or how the 'all' keyword applies. The schema covers parameters but the description should add context like default sorting or site scope.

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 parameters are well-documented in the schema. The tool description adds no additional semantic context beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 the action (list) and resource (port forwarding rules). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like unifi_get_port_forward_details or other list tools, missing the chance to specify scope or context.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of filtering criteria, pagination, or conditions that would help an agent decide between this and similar list tools.

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