unifi_protect_list_chimesLists UniFi Protect chimes with their volume levels and paired doorbell cameras to help review device pairings and audio settings.
List UniFi Protect chimes, their volume, and which doorbell cameras each is paired to.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already tells the agent this is a safe read operation. The description adds that volume and doorbell-pairing data are returned, but it does not describe pagination, authentication requirements, or failure behavior.
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 a single efficient sentence with the resource and key returned fields front-loaded. Every part of it contributes useful 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?
For a simple read-only list tool with no inputs and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it names the resource and highlights the important returned fields. Minor gaps such as pagination or response structure are acceptable given the tool's simplicity.
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, so there is no parameter semantics burden and the baseline score is 4. Nothing in the description is needed to clarify inputs.
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 (List), resource (UniFi Protect chimes), and returned attributes (volume and paired doorbell cameras). It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling list tools such as list_sensors or list_viewers.
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 listing purpose implies when to use the tool, but there is no explicit guidance about alternatives, prerequisites, or when not to use it. For a zero-parameter read-only list tool this is minimally adequate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.