unifi_reboot_device

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It restates the action ('Restart/Reboot') but does not disclose side effects such as client disconnection, downtime, or any system impact. It lacks detail on process, response, or safety considerations.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb, and contains no filler or redundancy. It conveys the key information efficiently.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers the action, target, and method. However, it omits any behavioral context like expected result, error conditions, or prerequisites, which could leave the agent uncertain about the tool's full effect.

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 0%, but the description explicitly states that the device is identified 'by MAC address', giving clear meaning to the single 'mac' parameter. This compensates for the lack of schema documentation, though it does not specify format details like delimiter or capitalization.

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 action (Restart/Reboot), the resource (UniFi device), the specific device types (Access Point, Switch, Gateway), and the method (by MAC address). It distinguishes from sibling tools like unifi_upgrade_device or unifi_locate_device.

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 by naming the action and resource, but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor alternatives. There are no exclusions or prerequisites mentioned, leaving the agent to infer context.

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