net_enable

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

The description thoroughly discloses behavioral traits: capture modes' hooking behavior, signTrace backtrace attachment, response capture wrapping, NSURLSession skip condition, and opts reset on each call. No annotations were provided, so the description carries full responsibility and meets it well.

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 dense but front-loaded with the core purpose. While lengthy, every part adds necessary detail for an advanced tool. It could be slightly more structured, but it remains effective.

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 complexity (5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is remarkably complete. It covers parameter behavior, mode differences, reset behavior, and even gives a usage flow. No output schema means return values are handled by sibling tools, which is fine.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions, but the description adds significant extra meaning: it explains the ttnet mode's hooking timing, the NSURLSession wrap skipping, and the non-sticky nature of urlFilter. This goes beyond schema basics.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Start in-process HTTP capture.' It specifies modes (nsurl, ttnet, all) and distinguishes from sibling tools like net_dump and net_disable by focusing on enabling capture.

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 includes a typical usage example (session_open with options) and notes that each call resets opts, but it does not explicitly specify when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide context for when not to use it.

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