unifi_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the operation is a read (GET), implying non-destructive behavior, but omits details about authentication, error handling, rate limits, or side effects. The minimal description fails to adequately inform the agent.

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 extremely concise (one sentence), but it lacks structure and front-loads only a generic purpose. Every word is used, but the sentence does not deliver comprehensive information. It is adequate in length but not well-organized.

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?

Given the absence of output schema and annotations, the description is far from complete. It does not describe return values, error states, or parameter constraints. The tool has moderate complexity (4 parameters, including nested objects), but the description provides insufficient context for correct usage.

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%, meaning the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. While it mentions 'pathParams/query as needed', it does not explain the required parameters 'entity' and 'operationId', nor provide context for their values. This leaves the agent without sufficient understanding of parameter usage.

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 states it invokes a read (GET) operation for an entity, providing a general purpose. However, it does not clearly differentiate from sibling tools like unifi_list_entities or unifi_describe_entity, which might also involve reading. The phrase 'read (GET) operation' is moderately clear but lacks specificity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions. Sibling tools exist but no comparison is provided, leaving the agent to guess the appropriate context.

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