unifi_gen_getvoucher

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds nothing beyond a doc URL – no note on what a voucher is, whether lookup fails for expired vouchers, or any auth/site scoping context.

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?

Front-loaded and brief, so nothing is bloated. However, the second half is a provenance URL ("generated from developer.ui.com/...") that conveys no actionable meaning to an agent, consuming half the description.

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 single-resource read with no output schema, the description should at least indicate what details are returned or the retrieval semantics. Instead it provides only a name echo and a source URL, so an agent knows essentially nothing beyond the annotations.

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%: voucherId carries only a UUID format and regex, with no explanation of what identifies the voucher or where it comes from. The description does not compensate for that gap at all.

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?

"Get Voucher Details" gives a clear verb and resource, but the description stops there and never distinguishes this from near-identical siblings such as unifi_net_get_voucher or unifi_gen_getvouchers. An agent reading only the description cannot tell which of the voucher-lookup tools 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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance at all. With several voucher retrieval siblings present, the absence of routing information is a real gap, leaving only the name to imply usage.

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