list_cameras

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces it as 'Read-only operation'. It adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotation by describing the per-camera summary fields and the targeting behavior for the Protect console, including the fallback to the first Protect-enabled device when device is omitted.

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 compact and front-loaded: the core action appears in the first sentence, followed by return details, usage guidance, the alternative tool, and a parameter note. Every sentence serves a distinct purpose without redundancy.

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-optional-parameter read-only listing tool, the description fully covers what the tool returns, why an agent would call it, how to choose an alternative, and how the optional device parameter behaves. No output schema exists, so the explicit summary-field disclosure is especially valuable.

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 device parameter's schema description already conveys the optional targeting behavior. The description's Args section repeats this same information without adding new semantics, so it neither hurts nor meaningfully improves on the schema.

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 begins with a specific verb and object: 'List every UniFi Protect camera with its online state and identity.' It also clarifies the return content (name, model, state, connection status) and distinguishes the tool from get_camera_health_summary and the camera detail/snapshot tools.

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?

Usage is explicitly stated: use this tool to discover camera_id values needed by get_camera_details, get_camera_snapshot, get_camera_health_summary, and event tools. It also names the alternative for aggregate counts, get_camera_health_summary, giving clear when-to-use guidance.

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