pm_conversations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not state that the tool is read-only, reads a file, or any side effects. The output schema exists but the description gives no behavioral context.

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?

Single sentence, no unnecessary words, and the key functionality is front-loaded. However, it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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?

With 3 parameters, a required file_path, and an expected output, the description is too minimal. It omits that the tool analyzes capture files, the output structure, and the ordering implied by 'top'. An output schema exists but is not leveraged in the 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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description only hints at conv_type values via the parentheses '(ip, tcp, or udp)'. file_path and limit are not explained at all, leaving the agent to infer meaning from names.

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 'Top conversations by bytes' with explicit protocol types (ip, tcp, udp), providing a specific verb-resource pair that distinguishes it from sibling tools like pm_troubleshoot_flow or pm_follow_stream.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention conditions, prerequisites, or comparisons with siblings such as pm_io_stats or pm_protocol_hierarchy.

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