unifi_delete_port_forward

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only states 'Delete,' which implies destructive action, but it does not disclose whether the deletion is permanent, what permissions are required, or what happens if the ID does not exist. The description lacks context about side effects or error behavior.

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, concise sentence that clearly states the action, resource, and parameter. No filler or redundant information. It is appropriately structured 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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema), so the description does not need to explain return values. However, it omits prerequisites (e.g., needing to list port forwards first), success/failure indicators, and any side effects. It is minimally complete but leaves gaps for an agent to infer.

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 schema provides no description for pfwd_id (0% coverage), and the parameter name already indicates it is an ID. The description adds the context that this ID identifies the port forwarding rule to delete, which is helpful but minimal. It does not explain the format or how to obtain the ID, so it only partially compensates for the schema gap.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('port forwarding rule') and identifies the method ('by ID'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like unifi_list_port_forwards and unifi_create_port_forward, so the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

Usage is implied: you would delete a port forward by its ID. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., unifi_list_port_forwards to find the ID), nor are any prerequisites or exclusions mentioned. The 'by ID' hints at needing a prior list call but does not state it.

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