slowest_requests

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the default privacy behavior ('URLs are masked by default') and the interpretation hints for dominant phases, but says nothing about ordering guarantees, whether it reads an already-loaded HAR, or any size/perf limits. The masking disclosure is the main piece of genuine behavioral value.

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?

A tight three-sentence block that front-loads the core purpose and uses parenthetical examples efficiently. Slight redundancy in enumerating the seven timing phases, which the output schema likely already conveys, but nothing is bloated.

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?

An output schema exists, so the long enumeration of return fields is largely redundant, while the more consequential gap — what the required `path` argument means — is unaddressed. For a three-parameter read tool this is adequate but leaves a real ambiguity in the only required input.

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% across three parameters, so the description must compensate and it largely does not. It explains include_secrets only indirectly ('URLs are masked by default'), and leaves the required `path` parameter and `limit` completely undefined — an agent must guess whether path is a filesystem path, a URL, or an identifier.

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 and resource with scope: 'List the slowest requests by total time', and further specifies the per-entry payload (timing breakdown plus dominant phase). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like failed_requests or find_requests by its ranking criterion, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied — the description suggests a performance-triage use case via the 'which phase dominates' framing, but never says when to choose this over waterfall, request_detail, or find_requests. No exclusions or preconditions are given.

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