Delete network

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so "IRREVERSIBLE" largely restates structured data. The genuinely useful behavioral detail - that deletion is gated behind confirm:"YES" and returns a preview otherwise, and what happens to network references - is absent from the description and only partially visible in the schema.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and then the risk. Nothing is wasted, though the terseness leaves the definition under-specified rather than optimal.

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 with no output schema and a confirm/preview workflow, the description fails to explain the safety gate, side effects on dependent objects, or the alternative delete tool. An agent could call it without knowing it must supply confirm:"YES" to actually apply.

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 coverage is 67%, with confirm and dry_run already documented in the schema. The description adds nothing about any parameter, and the undocumented required "id" (network identifier) is not compensated for 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?

States a clear verb and resource ("Deletes a network"), which is enough to know what it does. However, the sibling list contains unifi_gen_deletenetwork and unifi_net_delete_wifi, and nothing here explains when this one is the right delete tool versus those, so it lacks sibling differentiation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus unifi_gen_deletenetwork, no preconditions (e.g. checking unifi_net_get_network_references before deletion), and no mention that a preview path exists. "IRREVERSIBLE" signals caution but does not route the agent anywhere.

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