packets_summary

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

No annotations exist, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It does not indicate whether the tool is read-only, destructive, or any other side effects beyond returning data.

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 sentence, concise and front-loaded. However, it sacrifices informativeness for brevity, making it less useful.

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 three parameters and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not define 'LLM-sized,' the output structure, or parameter semantics.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description adds no meaning to parameters like capture_path, display_filter, or limit. It completely fails to explain their purpose.

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 it returns 'LLM-sized packet list rows,' which gives a basic idea but is vague. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like packets_fields or packets_json.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as packets_filter or packets_range. The description fails to provide any context for selection.

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