network_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states the tool returns application version and site details, implying a read-only operation. It does not mention potential side effects, but given the nature (info retrieval), the description is adequate.

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 sentences, each providing essential information. No wasted words; front-loaded with core purpose and followed by usage guidance.

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 has no parameters and an output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool does and its role in the workflow. It mentions return content and usage context, making it complete.

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?

No parameters exist, so the description cannot add parameter-level meaning. Schema description coverage is 100% (trivially). Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description meets that without needing extra detail.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves network application info and lists local sites. The phrase 'Get UniFi Network application info and list all local sites' uses specific verbs and resources. It also distinguishes from siblings by noting this tool is used to discover site IDs needed by other network_* tools.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this first to discover site IDs needed by other network_* tools,' providing clear guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. This sets it apart as a prerequisite step.

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