unifi_list_clients

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

Annotations show readOnlyHint and destructiveHint already. The description adds that the schema is minimal, does not expose signal strength/channel/per-port binding, and notes version verification, providing transparency beyond annotations without 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?

The description is well-structured with key info upfront (action, returned fields, limitations). It is moderately concise; each sentence adds value, though it could be slightly tighter.

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 presence of an output schema, the description appropriately lists key fields and explains limitations (no signal strength, no historical data). It is complete for a list tool with clear scope.

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% with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond schema (e.g., default limit), so baseline score of 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 clearly states 'List currently connected clients at a site', specifying the verb, resource, and scope. It also lists key returned fields, distinguishing it from sibling list tools for other resources.

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?

It explicitly states 'Use for: who's online right now' and clarifies that disconnected/historical clients are not included, guiding appropriate usage. It does not explicitly name alternative tools but context implies differentiation.

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