unifi_gen_getlag

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that, such as return shape, permission requirements, or rate-limit behavior; the only extra clause is a source-code provenance note.

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 short and front-loads the useful phrase 'Get LAG Details'. However, roughly half of it is a 'generated from developer.ui.com...' provenance note that does not help an agent select or invoke 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 one-parameter read tool this is thin: it does not explain what LAG details include, how lagId is obtained, or how it differs from sibling LAG tools. Annotations cover the safety profile, but the description leaves practical invocation context 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the burden of explaining lagId. It does not: lagId is self-identifying as an identifier and the schema constrains it to a UUID, but the description never says where to get it or what a LAG refers to in this context.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Get LAG Details'. It does not, however, distinguish this from sibling tools such as unifi_net_get_lag, unifi_gen_getlagpage, or unifi_net_list_lags, so an agent cannot tell which LAG-fetching tool to choose without inspecting schemas.

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 tool versus alternatives. The description does not explain when a single LAG lookup is appropriate compared with listing LAGs or using the page-level sibling, nor does it mention prerequisites for obtaining a lagId.

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