network_get_logs

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states 'Get captured network logs', implying read-only access, but does not mention side effects, authorization needs, or that logs must be pre-captured (e.g., via network_enable_monitoring).

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 a single sentence of 10 words, immediately stating the verb and resource. No unnecessary information or repetition.

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 tool has no output schema, so the description should explain what the logs contain (e.g., request details, timestamps). It also fails to mention that logs must be captured prior (e.g., enabling monitoring). This omission limits the tool's usability.

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% and the description merely mirrors the schema ('optionally filtered by URL pattern'). No additional semantics, syntax details, or examples are provided beyond what the schema already offers.

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 ('Get'), the resource ('captured network logs'), and an optional filter. It distinguishes from sibling tools like network_get_response_body which retrieves a specific response body.

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 implies usage (to retrieve logs) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like enabling network monitoring first.

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