unifi_protect_list_ptz_patrols

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

The annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to restate safety. The added note that there is no start/stop tool and the pointer to unifi_protect_list_ptz_presets gives behavioral context beyond the annotation by warning agents not to search for a mutating patrol control.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds a relevant cross-reference rather than empty prose.

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 list operation, the description is complete enough: it names the resource, implies the required camera identifier, and routes around a nonexistent start/stop operation. The absent output schema is acceptable because the 'List' verb makes the return shape inferable and the annotations/schema cover the rest.

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 only parameter, cameraId, is fully documented in the schema with a precise explanation of where to find it, its format, and what it is not. The tool description adds no param-specific detail, but with 100% schema coverage the schema already carries that burden.

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 opens with a specific verb ('List') and a concrete resource ('a PTZ camera's saved patrol routes'), so an agent immediately knows what the tool does. It also references unifi_protect_list_ptz_presets, which helps distinguish patrol routes from presets and explains the absence of a start/stop operation.

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 clearly states the action: list saved patrol routes for a PTZ camera. The cross-reference to unifi_protect_list_ptz_presets signals that an agent should look there to understand why start/stop tools do not exist, providing useful context for selecting among related tools.

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