unifi_list_dns_policies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true and destructiveHint: false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds context about what is returned (local DNS records and forward rules) and the return fields, which is useful beyond the annotations. 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?

The description is concise, front-loaded with the purpose, and every sentence adds value. It lists return fields without extra fluff, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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 moderate complexity, the description covers the purpose, scope, and return fields. Since an output schema exists, return types are already structured. The only minor gap is not explaining the filter parameter's syntax, but the schema covers that.

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%, so parameters like limit, offset, and filter are well documented. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, but it is not needed. 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 clearly states the tool lists DNS policies (local DNS records and forward rules) at a site, with a verb (List) and resource (DNS policies). It distinguishes from the sibling unifi_get_dns_policy by implying a list operation versus a single-item retrieval. The enumerated types add specificity.

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 mentions 'at a site' and the required siteId parameter implies the usage context, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like unifi_get_dns_policy. However, the list nature is clear, and for a list tool, that is adequate context.

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