unifi_list_mc_lag_domains

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context by specifying exact return fields, confirming it is a read-only list operation. 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?

Single sentence concisely conveys purpose and return fields. Front-loaded with action and resource. No redundant information.

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 is a simple list operation with an output schema (context signals indicate true) and complete schema coverage, the description provides sufficient context. Could mention pagination or default limits but not essential.

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?

Input schema covers all 4 parameters with full descriptions (100% coverage). The description does not add parameter-level details beyond the schema, but it clarifies output structure, which aids tool selection. 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 MC-LAG domains, explains what MC-LAG is, and lists key return fields (id, name, peers, lags, metadata.origin). It differentiates from sibling tools like unifi_get_mc_lag_domain by being a list operation.

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 for listing all MC-LAG domains but does not explicitly state when to use this vs. the single-domain get tool or other list tools. No clear when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions.

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