network_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the tool is non-disruptive to capture ('without stopping capture'), which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not state what happens when no requests are captured, whether the view is live/snapshot, or any side effects beyond not stopping capture.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately concise for a zero-parameter tool, though 'peek' is slightly informal and 'captured requests' could be more specific.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core action but leaves the tool's output format undefined. An agent knows it can view captured requests without stopping capture, but not what data will be returned or how to interpret it, which is a notable gap.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter semantics burden. The description does not need to clarify parameters, and the 'peek' framing aligns well with the lack of inputs.

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 uses a clear verb ('peek') and resource ('captured requests'), and adds a meaningful qualifier ('without stopping capture') that distinguishes it from network_stop. However, 'peek' is slightly informal and does not specify whether it returns a list, summary, or details.

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 phrase 'without stopping capture' implies this tool should be used while capture is running, rather than after network_stop. But it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over siblings like network_request or network_start, leaving usage context only implied.

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