network_capture_stop

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

The description adds behavior beyond the annotations by disclosing the release of the debugger lease, the structured error for invalid RegExp, and the capture_busy outcome for unauthorized sessions. These are specific behavioral traits not present in readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, or destructiveHint, and they do not contradict the annotations.

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?

Three sentences, each carrying essential information: the core action and filter options, the RegExp syntax and error behavior, and the session ownership constraint. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and contains no filler.

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 an output schema present, the description does not need to cover return values. It covers ownership, error cases, and the filtering dimensions, but it leaves timeout and session_id unexplained. Given the 7-parameter schema with zero descriptions, this is a small but notable gap, so the description is not fully complete.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does explain that optional filtering can be done by URL, resource type, HTTP status range, and response-body inclusion, and it defines the url_pattern syntax and error behavior. However, it does not explain timeout or session_id, and it does not map the filter categories to the exact parameter names, leaving some parameter meaning unresolved.

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?

Description states a specific verb and resource ('Stop Network capture') and adds that it releases the debugger lease. It is clearly distinguished from the sibling network_capture_start and console_capture_stop by name and action, so an agent can identify what this tool does.

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?

It gives clear context for use by describing that only the session that started the capture may stop it and that another session gets capture_busy. It does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives like console_capture_stop, but the 'stop network capture' action and ownership rule make usage conditions clear. No explicit exclusions of siblings, so not a 5.

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