unifi_gen_getnetworkreferences

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that — no statement of what is returned, whether references reflect dependent objects (firewall policies, Wi-Fi, etc.), or whether results can be large/truncated.

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?

It is short and front-loaded, so it is not bloated. But the brevity is under-specification rather than efficiency: the second half of the single sentence is a provenance URL that conveys nothing an agent can act on.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain what a reference list looks like; it does not. Combined with an undocumented required parameter and a duplicated sibling, an agent cannot confidently decide to call this tool or interpret its result.

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% for the single required networkId parameter, and the description supplies no compensating meaning — it does not say what a networkId identifies, where to obtain one, or what happens with an invalid/unknown ID. The description carries the full burden here and discharges none of it.

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 restates the tool name ("Get Network References") and appends a documentation URL. It never explains what a "network reference" is or what entity is being retrieved, and it does nothing to distinguish this from the near-identical sibling unifi_net_get_network_references, which appears in the same tool list.

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 call this versus unifi_net_get_network, unifi_net_get_network_references, or unifi_gen_getnetworkdetails — all of which plausibly overlap. The only added text is a source URL, which is not usage guidance.

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