Browser Network List

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the ordering behavior ('most recent first') and implies a read-only operation ('List'), but doesn't mention whether this returns all captured requests across tabs/sessions, whether it requires an active capture session, or what happens when no requests have been captured. The output schema exists but the description doesn't clarify the data scope or lifecycle.

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 core action and resource. It's efficient and easy to parse, though it could add a bit more context without becoming bloated.

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?

The tool has 4 parameters, no annotations, and 0% schema description coverage, so the description needs to carry more weight. It explains the basic purpose but leaves out parameter semantics, data scope, and relationship to capture lifecycle. An agent could call it with defaults, but would struggle to use the filtering parameters correctly or know what to expect in the output.

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%, so the description must compensate, but it doesn't explain any of the four parameters (n, tab, session, statuses). The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds zero value for understanding filtering semantics, defaults, or how they interact. This is a significant gap for a tool with 4 parameters and no schema 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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('captured network requests') with a clear ordering ('most recent first'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like browser_network_get (which likely retrieves a single request) and browser_network_capture_start/stop (which control capture), though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 this is for reading previously captured network requests, and the 'most recent first' ordering suggests a log-viewing use case. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this over browser_network_get or how it relates to capture start/stop tools. The context is clear enough for an agent to infer basic usage, but no explicit alternatives or exclusions are given.

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