safari_start_network_capture

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

With no annotations, the description supplies key behavioral traits: it intercepts fetch/XHR, captures headers/status/timing, and only records requests made after invocation. It does not mention side effects like performance impact or whether previous captures are cleared, but the disclosed behavior is sufficient and accurate.

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 extremely concise: three sentences total, with the first two providing core purpose and usage, and the third offering a clear alternative. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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 description covers the tool's effect (capturing network requests with details), its scope (only after call, once per page), and points to an alternative. It does not mention how to stop capture or retrieve the captured data, but the sibling list includes safari_network_details for viewing, so the context is reasonably complete for a start action.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing to document. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter information. It correctly omits any 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 clearly states the tool's action: 'Start capturing detailed network requests' with specific verb (start) and resource (network requests). It distinguishes itself from sibling safari_network by noting that safari_network provides a quick overview of already-loaded resources, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 explicitly advises 'Call once per page' and explains that it captures requests after the call only. It directly names an alternative: 'For quick overview of already-loaded resources, use safari_network instead.' This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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