Release all held requests

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

The description adds useful behavior beyond the readOnlyHint=false annotation: it acts on every currently held request, maps to network.continueRequest, and returns the number released. It does not discuss whether any held requests are skipped or what happens to interception state afterward, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Three short sentences are front-loaded with the action, then the use case, then the return value. Every sentence contributes needed information with no waste.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, the triggering condition, and the return value (count released). Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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?

This tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies the operation is global and parameter-free, with no misleading parameter details.

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 and resource: continue every intercepted request via network.continueRequest. It clearly distinguishes this bulk release from siblings like browser_network_intercept and browser_network_provide_response by framing it as operating on all held requests.

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?

It gives an explicit when-to-use rule: call it whenever a page seems stuck while interception is on, and labels it the safety valve. It does not name alternative tools such as browser_network_provide_response for handling specific held requests, so it stops just short of full alternative guidance.

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