unifi_get_traffic_report

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

The description discloses that it returns bytes sent/received and number of clients per interval, which gives insight into the output. However, with no annotations, it does not cover authorization needs, rate limits, or whether the report is real-time or cached. The term 'historical' implies past data, but more transparency would be beneficial.

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 only two sentences: the first states the overall purpose, the second details the report_type options and return summary. No extraneous information, perfectly sized for a simple tool.

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 low complexity (2 optional parameters, no output schema), the description covers the core functionality and output. It explains the report_type enum and the returned fields. However, it omits any explanation of site_id, which is important context for specifying the site. This is a minor gap.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the report_type parameter by listing its enum values and their meaning ('daily.site', etc.), but does not explain the site_id parameter at all. This partial coverage leaves a gap, though the main parameter is reasonably documented.

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 'Get historical traffic statistics' which is a specific verb+resource. It also enumerates the possible report_type values, making it distinct from siblings like unifi_get_device_stats or unifi_list_devices.

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. The description does not mention prerequisites, typical use cases, or when not to use it. The list of siblings includes many data retrieval tools, but no differentiation is provided.

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