network_start

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains that capture_bodies=True indexes by request_id enabling later body retrieval via network_get, and mentions CDP mechanism. However, it fails to mention how to stop capture, memory implications, or whether it auto-stops, which would be useful for an agent.

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 sentence for purpose followed by a clear Args section. No wasted words; every sentence adds value. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core action.

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 the output schema exists (not shown), return values need not be described. However, the description does not indicate what the tool returns after starting capture (e.g., a session ID or success status). Also missing is guidance on how to later stop capture. Still, it provides enough context for basic use.

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 provides only name, type, and default (0% coverage). The description adds critical context: capture_bodies=True enables indexing and allows later network_get with include_body=True via CDP. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 'Begin capturing network requests + responses with full headers,' specifying a concrete action on a specific resource. It distinguishes from siblings like network_get (which retrieves captured data) and export_har (which exports), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 usage before network_get but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like console_start or coverage_start. No exclusions or conditions for use are provided, so guidance is implied but not explicit.

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