get_host

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds important return-behavior detail: the host record is returned verbatim and includes reportedState GPS coordinates. It does not cover error cases, permissions, or side-effect guarantees, but 'Get details' and 'returned verbatim' sufficiently signal a read-only retrieval for a simple getter.

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?

Two short, purposeful sentences. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the parameter explanation is compact and directly actionable. No filler or repetition of schema-provided 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?

For a single-parameter getter with an output schema present, this description is complete. It explains how to identify the target, what formats are accepted, and what the response contains. The agent has everything needed to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so the description must fully explain the parameter. It does: host can be a console name, ID, or composite ID in MAC:numericId format for cloud consoles. This adds meaningful format semantics beyond the raw string type in the schema.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('details for a single UniFi console'), and clarifies the lookup key ('by name or ID'). It is clearly distinct from list_hosts, which would be the list counterpart, and from device-focused getters in the sibling set.

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 makes the intended use clear: retrieve one console using a name, ID, or composite ID. It does not explicitly name alternatives like list_hosts or exclude list operations, but the 'single console' scoping provides enough context for an agent to choose it over list tools.

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