stat_sysinfo

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the fetch action, implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose permissions, caching behavior, or any side effects. This lack of detail is a gap for a tool that might require admin privileges.

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 that immediately conveys the tool's purpose without extraneous words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 a simple no-parameter query, and an output schema exists to describe return values, so the description needn't cover those. However, it could benefit from a phrase indicating what 'system information' includes (e.g., controller version, uptime), but the overall context is adequate.

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 tool has zero parameters, making parameter documentation unnecessary. Per the scoring rules, the baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description appropriately omits any parameter details, so this score reflects that.

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 a specific action ('Fetch') and resource ('system information from the UniFi controller'). It is not a tautology and provides enough clarity to distinguish it from pure list tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate from closely named siblings like 'stat_full_status'.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. An agent would have to infer from the name and the context of 'system information' to decide to use it.

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