unifi_invoke

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

Discloses that the tool can perform writes and is gated by an environment variable, which is useful. However, without annotations, it omits details on side effects, auth requirements beyond the env variable, rate limits, or idempotency, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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 concise sentences, each adding distinct value: the core functionality and an important constraint. No redundancy or unnecessary words.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse to fully guide the agent. It lacks details on valid entities/operations, request formatting, and what the tool returns, making it incomplete for reliable invocation.

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 description implies that operationId is the operation identifier from 'by id', but provides no explanation for entity, body, query, or pathParams. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to add meaning beyond the schema, making parameter usage unclear.

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 'Invoke any operation by id (including writes)' which specifies the action (invoke) and the resource (operation by id). It distinguishes from siblings which are for listing, describing, and getting entities, not invoking operations.

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?

Provides context: 'Gated off unless UNIFI_ALLOW_WRITES=true' and 'Post-v1 write path', but lacks explicit guidance on when to use vs siblings (e.g., for creating/updating/deleting) and no when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations.

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