unifi_delete_port_forward

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'delete' implying destruction but provides no details on permanence, effects on network traffic, authorization requirements, or rate limits.

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 (one sentence, seven words). However, it sacrifices essential detail for brevity, missing parameter context and usage guidance. It is not front-loaded with critical information.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and zero parameter coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, error handling, or how to obtain the forward_id. A delete tool for a specific resource should include more contextual cues for safe invocation.

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 0%, and the description adds no explanation of parameters beyond naming '_id' which corresponds to 'forward_id'. The optional 'site_id' parameter is completely undocumented, leaving the agent without guidance on its purpose or default behavior.

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 'delete' and the resource 'port forwarding rule', specifying identification by '_id'. It is specific and distinct from sibling tools like unifi_create_port_forward or unifi_update_port_forward.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update_port_forward to modify instead). No mention of prerequisites like needing the _id from list_port_forwards or when it is appropriate to delete a rule.

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