sharkd_frames

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool returns frames with range/filter, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination (implied by skip/limit parameters), performance implications, or lack of side effects. Output schema exists but is not referenced.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, no wasted words. Efficiently conveys core functionality.

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?

Despite the presence of an output schema, the description fails to cover the tool's parameter complexity (6 params, 1 required) and usage nuances. It does not mention the required session_id, optional columns, or timeout, leaving the agent with incomplete information to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, and the description only loosely references 'bounded range or display filter', which hints at skip, limit, and display_filter parameters. It does not explain session_id, columns, timeout, or the relationship between parameters. With 6 parameters and no schema descriptions, the description provides insufficient semantic value.

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 verb 'Return', the resource 'sharkd packet-list frames', and the context 'for a bounded range or display filter'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'sharkd_frame' (which likely returns a single frame).

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 implies usage for retrieving packet lists with range or filter criteria, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'sharkd_frame' or 'packets_filter'. No guidance on when not to use.

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