unifi_networks

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true), description flags delete as Destructive and requires confirm:true, warns that it changes live configuration in the confirm parameter description, and documents list pagination. This adds meaningful behavior about destructive operations and response format.

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?

Organized into operations list, pagination, filtering, and body reference; every sentence adds needed information without repetition. Dense but efficient.

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?

Covers list pagination and filtering thoroughly, and delete confirm requirement. However, non-list operations lack explicit return shape or field details; relies on unifi_spec. Given no output schema and 10 params, it is mostly complete but has some fallbacks.

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 descriptions are present for all parameters, but the description adds deep filter grammar (functions, combining, quoting, like escapes) and response paging structure not in schema. It also directs to unifi_spec for body schemas, crucial for create/update.

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 'Networks (VLANs/subnets) configuration' and enumerates six specific operations (list, create, delete, get, update, get_references), each with a short summary and read/destructive marker. This distinguishes it from sibling tools targeting other Unifi resources.

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?

Provides operational context: delete requires confirm, list returns paginated data, filtering grammar detailed, and body shapes delegated to unifi_spec. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative sibling tools or state exclusions; usage is implied by resource domain.

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