Get host detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds the account-level scope and console semantics, but does not explain authentication needs, return shape, or whether missing IDs error.

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 a single compact fragment with the resource and scope front-loaded and no wasted words. The terseness borders on under-specification, but it is structurally efficient.

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 simple one-parameter read tool, annotations and schema carry most of the burden, and the description gives the essential purpose. However, with a nearly identical sibling like unifi_gen_gethostbyid present, the definition is not complete enough to prevent wrong-tool selection.

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 100%, and the id parameter already documents that it is the consoleId from list_hosts. The description adds no parameter syntax or validation detail beyond the schema, 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 resource and scope: detail for a single host at account level, with 'console' clarifying what a host is. It does not, however, distinguish this tool from the very similar sibling unifi_gen_gethostbyid.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool instead of unifi_gen_gethostbyid or after unifi_sm_list_hosts. The 'Account-level' note gives context but does not state prerequisites, alternatives, or exclusions.

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