UniFi: Get Console Info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is established. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotation: it explains the API version dependency, that older consoles will have missing tools, and that this tool names required versions and gated capabilities. This helps the agent anticipate failures in related tools.

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 three sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, the version-context sentence explains why the tool exists, and the final sentence provides a clear call-to-action. Every sentence earns its place.

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 zero-parameter, read-only diagnostic tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It states what the tool reports, why the information matters, and exactly when an agent should invoke it. There are no missing inputs, side effects, or complex output expectations to clarify.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty, so the description carries no parameter burden. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately explains the tool's purpose without inventing unnecessary parameter details.

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 tool reports the console's UniFi Network version and its supported tool set, using a specific verb and resource. It is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools that operate on clients, devices, sites, or networks, as this is a meta-tool about the console's capabilities.

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?

The description gives explicit usage conditions: call when a tool is missing or returns 404, and explains why (older consoles lack endpoints introduced in Network 10.0). This is direct, actionable guidance for an agent to decide when this tool is the right choice.

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