Browser Network Capture Stop

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It discloses one behavioral trait: the buffer is kept until the next start, which indicates that stopping does not discard collected data. However, it does not mention effects like whether stopping clears the buffer, what happens if no capture is active, or any side effects. The disclosure is minimal but not contradictory.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action and includes a useful parenthetical about buffer behavior. There is no filler or redundancy; every part serves a purpose.

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 that the tool has no annotations and zero parameter documentation, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the role of 'tab' or 'session', nor does it specify conditions like 'use only after a capture has started'. While an output schema exists, the lack of parameter semantics and explicit usage context leaves the agent with insufficient information for correct invocation in varied scenarios.

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 makes no mention of the 'tab' and 'session' parameters. Since the schema itself likely provides only types and defaults, the description must add meaning to help the agent choose values, but it fails to do so. This is a significant 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?

The description clearly states a specific verb ('Stop recording network requests') and resource ('network requests'), and it directly contrasts with the sibling 'browser_network_capture_start' by indicating the stopping action. It is unambiguous and distinguishes itself from other network 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?

Usage is implied by the name and the parenthetical about buffer retention, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to stop a capture session) or any exclusions. The description does not mention prerequisites like a prior capture start, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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