unifi_get_client

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states it gets details but does not mention read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what constitutes 'details'. Minimal transparency.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with purpose, no redundant words. Efficient and to the point.

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 read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It explains the basic function but lacks details on return value format, error scenarios, or the scope of 'details'. Could be more 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by explaining client_id's role ('by client ID'). However, site_id is not explained (default is 'default'), and its purpose remains unclear. Some added meaning but incomplete.

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 details for a single client by client ID (Integration API)' clearly states the action (get details), the resource (client), and the identifier (client ID). It distinguishes from sibling tools like unifi_list_clients (list multiple) and unifi_get_client_stats (stats only).

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. There are many sibling tools for clients (e.g., unifi_list_clients, unifi_get_client_stats), but the description does not provide any context for selection.

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