safari_throttle_network

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses reset behavior and custom options, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., scope, persistence, impact on existing requests).

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: two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and efficiently covers profiles, custom options, and reset behavior.

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 main purpose, options, and reset, but lacks details about scope (tab/session), duration, and interaction with other network tools. For a simple tool, it is adequate but could be more complete.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for each parameter. The description repeats the profile list and adds reset information, but does not significantly enhance meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 simulates slow network conditions, lists specific profiles (slow-3g, fast-3g, 4g, offline) and custom options, and includes reset behavior. It accurately distinguishes from sibling tools like safari_network by focusing on throttling.

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 provides clear usage context (simulate slow network) and implicit guidance (call with no args to reset). However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools or state when not to use it, though no direct sibling competitor exists.

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