unifi_get_info

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds important behavioral details: what is returned (only applicationVersion), notes version-specific verification (10.5.43), and clarifies absence of other fields like isUniFiOSConsole. No contradiction.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states purpose, second specifies return, third provides usage recommendation. Efficient and front-loaded.

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?

With an output schema present, the description doesn't need to explain return values. It covers purpose, single return field, and usage scenario completely for a simple info tool.

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?

There are no parameters (0 params), so the baseline is 4. The description does not add parameter info but that's unnecessary. The output schema exists, so return values are covered there.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves UniFi Network application info and returns applicationVersion. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (which focus on specific entities like clients, devices, etc.) by targeting general application info.

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 explicitly advises using this tool for version checks before calling version-gated tools, providing clear context. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the guidance is sufficient.

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