list_local_sites

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so very well. It discloses that all pages are drained by default, that offset/limit fetch a single page, that the native envelope is preserved, and that capped drains return incomplete=true rather than silently truncating. This is rich, honest behavioral context.

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 compact and front-loaded with the action, followed by parameter and behavior details in logical order. Every sentence provides useful information and there is no redundancy or filler.

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 list operation with an output schema, the description covers host parameters, pagination behavior, and the filter option well. The main missing piece is explicit guidance for choosing this tool among closely related siblings, but the core calling context is adequately complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it mostly does. It explains host formats, the meaning of offset/limit, and the existence of filter. The filter parameter is only described as an 'optional UniFi Integration API filter' without syntax details, which leaves a small semantic 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 opens with a clear verb and resource: 'List sites managed by one UniFi Network application.' This conveys the core purpose precisely. It does not explicitly name sibling tools like list_sites or list_all_sites_aggregated, but the 'one UniFi Network application' scope provides useful differentiation.

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 gives strong guidance on pagination behavior and when to use offset/limit manually. However, it does not explicitly explain when to choose this tool over the many sibling list tools, such as list_sites or list_all_sites_aggregated. The scope is implied but not contrasted with alternatives.

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