zen_intercept

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explains the operations (op: add/clear/list/log/clearLog) and effects (block/redirect), disclosing that 'block' cancels requests. However, it does not mention what 'list' or 'log' return, which is a minor gap.

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: a single-line purpose, a one-sentence use case, and a bullet list of arguments. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is easy to scan.

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?

While the description explains parameters and usage, it does not describe the return value or behavior of 'list' and 'log' operations. Given no output schema, this gap reduces completeness. The tool is straightforward, but output behavior is missing.

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 0%, but the description fully explains each parameter: op (with allowed values), patterns (regex array), and effect (default block). This adds crucial meaning beyond the minimal schema (title and type only).

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 explicitly states the tool's function: 'Block, log, or redirect HTTP requests by URL regex.' This clearly identifies the verb ('intercept') and the resource ('HTTP requests'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like zen_navigate or zen_cache.

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 a concrete use case: 'Useful to suppress analytics/ads during agent runs (3–10× page speed-up).' It does not explicitly list when not to use or name alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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