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

Annotations already establish read-only/idempotent/non-destructive behavior, so the description is free to add the traits that matter here: only DECRYPTED HTTPS traffic is visible, bodies are truncated (32,000 chars), and results are ordered most-recent-first. It stops short of saying what happens if no capture is active or whether the snapshot is a live buffer or a drain.

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?

Three dense sentences: capture scope and precondition first, returned fields second, filter/limit controls last. No filler and nothing buried.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return contract itself by enumerating every field (method, url, host, status, contentType, sizes, durationMs) plus the conditional headers/bodies, and it covers all five parameters and the session prerequisite.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes further by tying includeBodies to a concrete effect (headers plus truncated bodies appear in the output) and by restating the limit semantics as 'most recent limit flows' with urlSubstring/onlyErrors as alternative narrowing levers.

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?

Names a specific verb (snapshot) and resource (recent DECRYPTED HTTPS request/response flows), and explicitly ties the data to a prior ios_traffic_start, which separates it from ios_traffic_status, ios_pcap_start, and ios_safari_capture_network.

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?

States the precondition clearly ('captured since ios_traffic_start') and explains which filters to apply for narrower queries, but never names an alternative tool (e.g., ios_traffic_status for capture state or android_traffic_flows for the other platform) or says when this tool is the wrong choice.

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