ruyi_intercept_responses

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the responseStarted stage, URL pattern filtering, and the need for ruyi_intercept_wait to consume. However, it omits important behavioral details such as how to stop interception, what happens to responses if not consumed, and potential side effects on page flow. This is moderate disclosure, not complete.

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 three short sentences, each providing distinct information: the action, the filtering capability, and the consumption mechanism. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no wasted words.

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 tool that starts stateful interception, the description provides the essentials (start, filter, consume) but lacks important context like how to stop (ruyi_intercept_stop is a sibling but not mentioned), the meaning of pageIdx, and lifecycle/cleanup behaviors. Given no output schema and no annotations, this is a minimal but not fully complete description.

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 50%. The description explains that URL pattern filtering is supported, adding meaning to the urlPatterns parameter beyond its schema description. However, pageIdx has no description in either schema or description, leaving its purpose unexplained. The description adds some value but does not fully compensate for the missing pageIdx semantics.

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 function: 'Begin intercepting HTTP responses (responseStarted stage)' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling ruyi_intercept_requests by focusing on 'responses' and specifying the stage. This is a clear, specific purpose.

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 usage context by saying intercepted responses are consumed with ruyi_intercept_wait, indicating the workflow. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or contrast with ruyi_intercept_requests, but the response-specific focus and the reference to ruyi_intercept_wait imply appropriate usage scenarios.

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