browser.get_network_log

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds valuable behavioral context: all sensitive headers and bodies are automatically PII-scrubbed, which is critical for agents handling privacy. Also mentions filtering capabilities. No contradictions with 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?

Two sentences with no waste. First sentence states core purpose, second adds filter and PII scrubbing. Information is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given no output schema, description covers key aspects: what is returned (HTTP request/response entries), session context, filters, and PII handling. Could be more complete by mentioning that entries are from the captured log of the session, but it is sufficient for a simple retrieval tool.

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 description must compensate. It explains 'method (GET/POST/...)' and 'URL substring' for url_contains, adding meaning beyond parameter names. However, session_id and limit are not explained, though they are somewhat self-explanatory. Partially compensates.

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 clearly states what the tool does: return captured HTTP request/response entries for a session. It mentions filtering by method or URL substring, providing specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from closely related siblings like get_request_failures or get_console.

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?

Description implies when to use (when need network log entries with filters) but provides no guidance on when not to use or explicit alternatives. No mention of preferring get_request_failures for errors or get_console for console logs.

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