unifi_protect_list_lights

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

With readOnlyHint=true, the safety profile is already covered by annotations. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying exactly which floodlight attributes are exposed, including connection state, on/off state, PIR motion detection, and brightness. It does not go into response envelope or error semantics, but for a simple list operation this is adequate.

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?

A single sentence that starts with the verb and object, then lists the four key output attributes without filler. Every element adds information needed to select and use the 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?

For a no-parameter, read-only listing operation, the description is complete: it identifies the resource, the type of operation, and the meaningful data fields in the result. There is no output schema, but the description supplies the essential return semantics that an agent needs.

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 has no properties, so there are no parameters to document. With 0 params the baseline is 4; the description appropriately focuses on what the list returns rather than on parameter explanations.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and clear resource ('UniFi Protect floodlights'), and explicitly enumerates the data returned: connection state, light-on status, PIR motion detection, and brightness. This cleanly distinguishes it from sibling listing tools for cameras, sensors, chimes, viewers, and liveviews.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving floodlight status/results, which is a clear selection context among the sibling tools. It does not name alternative tools or explicitly state when not to use it, but the resource-specific wording leaves little ambiguity for an agent matching intent to tool.

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