network_delay

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the tool injects delay and does not match by path, but does not describe effects on connections, whether it is destructive, or the implications of parameters like delay, jitter, and duration.

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 very short and front-loads the main action, but its brevity comes at the cost of missing critical details, making it under-specified for practical use.

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 has 8 parameters, 4 required, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain parameter roles, defaults, return values, or usage examples.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining parameters. It only indirectly hints at the 'direction' parameter ('supports to') and provides no information about selector_value, target_selector_value, namespaces, delay format, jitter, or duration.

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 tool's purpose: injecting delay into network connections between services, with explicit mention that it supports the 'to' direction. It also distinguishes itself from a sibling by noting it does not match by HTTP path.

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 an explicit alternative (httpchaos_delay) for when path-based injection is needed, but does not discuss when to use this tool versus other siblings like network_loss or network_external_delay.

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