unifi_gen_updateaclruleordering

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the name, such as whether ordering changes take effect immediately, permission requirements, or how the confirm/dry_run preview flow works.

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 appropriately short and front-loads the action and resource. The vendor documentation URL is marginally useful as provenance but does not add operational guidance.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the annotations and schema carry most of the needed detail. However, the description omits important selection context against the duplicate unifi_net reorder tool and says nothing about the confirm/dry_run workflow.

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 100%, and the schema documents the body, confirm, and dry_run parameters. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Reorder User-Defined ACL Rules.' This is clear enough to understand the operation, but it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling unifi_net_reorder_acl_rules or clarify the generated/raw API scope.

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 unifi_net_reorder_acl_rules, unifi_net_get_acl_rule_ordering, or the other ACL tools. The intended usage is only implied by the tool name.

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