we_preview_observe

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=false, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is already given. The description adds that events are 'bounded', frames are PNG, and that reload re-reads a fixed snapshot; it does not explain auth requirements, rate limits, or how reload differs from re-calling observe.

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 tight sentences with no filler, and the core read purpose is front-loaded ahead of the reload/open-a-new-preview guidance. Dense but each clause carries meaning.

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 five parameters at 0% schema coverage and no output schema, the description should carry more burden than it does. It omits parameter meanings, pagination/streaming semantics (afterCursor, intervalMs), and what the returned diagnostics/frames look like.

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% for all five parameters. The description only loosely gestures at 'reload' and 'bounded' events, leaving previewId, count, intervalMs, and afterCursor (pagination) entirely undocumented in both schema and prose, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States specific verbs and resources: reads CEF target diagnostics, bounded console/network events, and PNG frames. It partially differentiates from siblings by contrasting with 'open a new preview for newer source revisions' (we_preview_open), though it never mentions we_preview_close or the other preview tools.

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?

Gives one useful routing hint: use 'reload' to refresh the fixed preview snapshot, and open a new preview for newer source revisions. However it does not state the general when-to-use context versus the other eleven siblings, nor prerequisites, so guidance is only partially implied.

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