unifi_protect_list_liveviews

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes the read-only safety profile. The description adds useful behavioral context by explaining that live views are named grid layouts and that the returned id serves a specific purpose in unifi_protect_update_viewer, going beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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?

Two sentences with no filler: the first states the action and defines the resource, the second explains why the return value matters. Information is front-loaded and every clause 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 list tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool does, what its domain term means, and what the returned id will be used for. No essential detail an agent needs to invoke this tool correctly is missing.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to add; per the 0-param baseline this is adequately handled. The description's mention of the returned id is output-focused, not parameter-focused, and doesn't need to compensate for any schema gap.

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 a specific resource ('saved live views'), and defines the term as 'named camera grid layouts shown on viewers and in the Protect app.' This clearly separates it from sibling list tools like list_viewers and list_cameras, and the second sentence connects the output to a downstream tool.

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 states that the returned id is exactly what unifi_protect_update_viewer needs to place a layout on a screen, which gives a clear calling context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use the tool, but the downstream reference is sufficient for a list-with-no-filters tool.

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