Network Intercept

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It indicates mutability ('add or remove') but does not disclose side effects like rule application scope or potential disruption. A mid-range score is appropriate.

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 two sentences with no redundancy. It front-loads the primary action and resource, making it immediately scannable.

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 tool has 7 parameters fully documented in schema and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and key usage patterns. It could elaborate on mock behavior, but schema covers details.

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%, so all parameters are described. The description adds minimal extra value beyond the schema, e.g., clarifying urlPattern requirement for certain actions, but does not significantly enhance understanding.

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 (add/remove network intercept rules) and specific use cases (block ads, mock APIs, log traffic). It distinguishes from siblings like network_log by specifying intercept actions.

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 explicit guidance for removal ('Use action='remove' with ruleId') and lists the possible actions. While not exhaustive on when not to use it, it gives enough context for correct invocation.

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