query-network-traffic

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the latency behavior (pages take seconds to load), which is useful, but it does not mention the return format, read-only nature, or any error/edge-case behavior. This leaves significant gaps for an agent.

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 concise at two sentences, front-loading the main query capability and timing advice. The 'time range' phrase is inaccurate and wastes words, preventing a perfect score, but the overall structure is efficient.

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?

The description lacks essential context: it does not specify what the tool returns (e.g., a list of requests), how it relates to get-network-details, or any output format. Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete for an agent to confidently use the tool and interpret results.

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 descriptions cover 100% of the parameters, so the baseline is 3. However, the description mentions 'time range' which is not a parameter in the schema, actively misleading agents into thinking a time filter exists. It also fails to reference method, statusCode, or limit, adding no value beyond the schema.

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 queries network requests and specifies the source (active Chrome debugging session), distinguishing it from siblings like get-network-details. However, the mention of 'time range' is misleading because no time range parameter exists in the schema, slightly clouding the tool's actual filtering capabilities.

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 explicitly notes the prerequisite of an active Chrome debugging session and advises waiting a few seconds for pages to load, giving clear timing guidance. It does not mention exclusions or alternatives, but the context is sufficient for basic usage.

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