unifi_list_dpi_applications

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, consistent with 'list'. The description adds context by specifying return fields (id, name) and noting the data is 'global', which implies no site-specific filtering. No contradictions.

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 a single, clear sentence plus a brief 'Returns:' note. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with purpose and key differentiator.

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 list tool with a well-defined schema and output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, differentiation, and return format. It is complete given the tool's simplicity.

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% description coverage for its three parameters (limit, filter, offset). The tool description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 DPI applications (specific apps like 'Netflix', 'Zoom') and explicitly distinguishes it from the sibling 'unifi_list_dpi_categories' by noting it is 'more granular'. The verb 'list' and resource 'DPI applications' are specific.

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 includes a direct comparison with 'unifi_list_dpi_categories', indicating when to prefer this tool for finer-grained application details. However, it does not elaborate on other alternatives or when not to use it.

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