filter_validate_capture

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context about the interface being required due to link type dependency, which is not in the annotations. It does not contradict any 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, both purposeful. The first sentence states the action and object; the second explains a key dependency. There is no redundancy or 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?

For a simple validation tool with an output schema and clear annotations, the description covers the essential context (interface-link type dependency). It does not describe behavior for invalid filters or interface errors, but these are likely surfaced via errors or output schema, so the description is adequately 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?

The schema has zero description coverage, so the description must clarify both parameters. It identifies capture_filter as a BPF expression and interface as a specific interface tied to link type, providing basic semantic meaning. However, it lacks format details or constraints for the filter expression, leaving some gaps.

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 the tool validates a BPF capture filter expression, using a specific verb and resource. The term 'capture' distinguishes it from display filter validation tools like filter_validate_display, and the interface requirement adds specificity.

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 implies when to use this tool (for BPF capture filters) by naming 'capture filter' and explains the critical interface dependency. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though the sibling context makes this reasonably clear.

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