remote_spy_start

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions an error condition, but does not explain the logging scope, performance impact, or the need for corresponding tools (remote_spy_stop, remote_spy_dump). The description is too minimal.

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—two sentences—with no extraneous words. It front-loads the primary action and adds a relevant error condition. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description covers the basic purpose and a key error. However, it omits essential context: that logging can be stopped via remote_spy_stop and logs retrieved via remote_spy_dump, which are sibling tools.

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 input schema has one parameter 'filter' with no description (0% schema coverage). The tool description does not explain what 'filter' does or how it affects logging. Since schema coverage is low, the description should compensate, but it fails to do so.

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 the action: 'Start logging outgoing remote traffic.' It uses a specific verb-resource pair and implicitly distinguishes from siblings like remote_spy_stop (stop) and remote_spy_dump (dump).

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 provides some usage context by noting an error condition (missing hooks), but it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No comparison or when-not-to-use information is given.

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