unifi_protect_get_event

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares the operation is read-only, and the description's 'Get' verb is consistent. The description adds meaningful behavioral context about what the record contains and includes a caveat ('where the camera captured them'), setting expectations that metadata may be incomplete. No contradiction with annotations.

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 just two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, expands with specific metadata examples, and ends with the crucial usage instruction. 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 simple one-parameter read-only getter with no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns and where to obtain the required id. It does not describe the response structure or error behavior, but those are less critical given the tool's simplicity and the readOnly annotation.

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 100% and the eventId parameter already has a clear description. The tool description reinforces it by instructing the agent to use the id from unifi_protect_list_events, adding cross-tool context that helps the agent correctly source the parameter value.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Get one event's full record') and explicitly distinguishes this tool from the search-like sibling by listing detection metadata the search results leave out (per-object tracking, detected zones, license plate text, vehicle attributes). An agent can clearly tell it apart from unifi_protect_list_events and other getters.

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?

It gives a direct usage pointer: 'Use the `id` from unifi_protect_list_events,' establishing the prerequisite and source of the required parameter. It also contrasts with 'search results,' implying this is the tool to use when the full record with detection metadata is needed. It does not explicitly enumerate exclusions, but the context is clear.

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