unifi_get_firewall_policy_ordering

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the tool returns 'beforeSystemDefined[] and afterSystemDefined[] arrays', which is behavioral context. However, it does not disclose any additional traits like authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens if the pair doesn't exist.

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 two sentences, front-loads the purpose, and includes return structure. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (3 required params, read-only, output schema exists), the description adequately explains what the tool returns and the ordering. It could mention that it only applies to user-defined policies, but it does. Minor omission: no description of what happens when no policies exist.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with brief descriptions for all three parameters. The description does not add any extra meaning, such as format, constraints, or examples. Since schema coverage is high, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Get') and resource ('evaluation order of user-defined firewall policies') with a clear scope ('for a specific (source zone, destination zone) pair'). This differentiates it from sibling tools like unifi_list_firewall_policies which list all policies, and unifi_get_firewall_policy which gets a single policy.

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?

The description implies usage by stating what the tool does, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives like unifi_list_firewall_policies or unifi_get_firewall_policy. There is no guidance on prerequisites or exclusions.

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