列出网络请求

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. '捕获到的' implies data comes from an active capture, and it discloses the available filter modes including failure/4xx/5xx subsets, which is useful context. However, it omits pagination behavior, default limits, and return shape for a 9-parameter read tool.

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 single well-formed sentence with the core action front-loaded and filters enumerated efficiently. No wasted clauses, though it leaves useful detail unstated.

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?

For a 9-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the main filter parameters but is silent on time-range (since), result cap (limit), and pagination. Adequate but with clear gaps for an agent to call it precisely.

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 89%, so the schema already documents nearly every parameter. The description restates the filter dimensions (URL, method, type, status, failure flags) but adds no format or syntax detail and never mentions limit, since, or targetId. Baseline 3 applies when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('列出' / list) and resource ('网络请求' / network requests), and the filtering scope is described concretely. It implicitly separates itself from sibling network_detail (single request) and network_clear, but does not name any sibling 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?

The description explains what can be filtered but gives no guidance on when to choose this over network_detail, network_body, or network_clear. No prerequisites (e.g. that a capture must be running) or exclusions are stated.

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