capture_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral context by specifying the output content ('packet counts and file information') and the notion of 'current' status, which is useful beyond the annotations. However, it does not address error cases or session lifecycle (e.g., stopped sessions).

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that directly states the purpose and key output details. There is no unnecessary information or fluff.

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 simple getter with an output schema and safe annotations, the description is largely sufficient. It tells exactly what the tool returns and implies the session identifier. Minor gaps like behavior for nonexistent sessions or whether it works on completed sessions are not critical but could be added.

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%, and the description does not explain the capture_session_id parameter or how to obtain it. While the parameter name is self-explanatory, the description adds no semantics beyond the schema, failing to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('capture session'), and adds outcome details ('packet counts and file information'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like capture_list_sessions (listing sessions) and capture_stop (stopping).

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The name and description imply use for a single session's current status, but no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned. Context from sibling tool names helps but the description does not direct the agent.

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