unifi_gen_deletednspolicy

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is partially covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond a provenance URL: it never says the deletion is irreversible, what happens to references to the policy, or that omitting confirm yields a preview rather than an execution.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence naming the action, plus a provenance tag. Nothing is padded or buried, though the developer.ui.com URL is agent-irrelevant noise rather than useful context.

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 destructive, open-world mutation with no output schema, the definition should explain irreversibility, the confirm/dry_run gate, and error behavior. None of that appears, and the ambiguity with the sibling delete tool is unresolved.

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?

At 67% schema coverage, two of three parameters (confirm, dry_run) are self-documented, but dnsPolicyId has no description in the schema and none here either. The description contributes zero parameter meaning, so it fails to compensate for the modest coverage gap on the required identifier.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete DNS Policy'), which is unambiguous on its own. However, it does nothing to distinguish itself from the near-identical sibling unifi_net_delete_dns_policy, leaving the agent to guess which delete-DNS-policy variant to pick.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus unifi_net_delete_dns_policy, no mention of preconditions, and no warning about when not to delete. The only usage-adjacent information (preview via confirm/dry_run) lives in the schema, not the description.

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