unifi_get_acl_rule_ordering

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

Description adds that it returns an array of IDs with order semantics ('Rules higher in the list win'), complementing annotations which only indicate read-only safety. Provides useful behavioral 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?

Very concise two-sentence description that front-loads the purpose and includes return format and ordering rule. No superfluous text.

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 read-only tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is largely complete. It could mention that siteId is required or that it is safe to call, but the annotations cover read-only safety.

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 covers 100% of parameters with a description for siteId. Description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score 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?

Description clearly states the action ('Get the evaluation order of user-defined ACL rules') and specifies the return format. It distinguishes from sibling tools like unifi_get_acl_rule (single rule) and unifi_list_acl_rules (list rules) by focusing on ordering.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The purpose is implied by the name and description, but lacks direct comparison or usage scenarios.

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