browser_network_requests

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get list of network requests' and provides no information about return format, data scope, side effects, or whether it captures ongoing requests or just historical logs. This is a significant gap for a network-related tool.

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, short sentence and is front-loaded. However, it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise; it provides only the bare purpose without any context. It is not as minimal as a tautology, but it does not pack enough useful information to merit a higher score.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the returned data looks like or at least clarify its relationship to the sibling tool browser_get_network_logs. It does neither, making the tool ambiguous and incomplete for an agent trying to decide whether to invoke it.

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 the schema is empty. Per the rubric, 0 parameters gets a baseline of 4. The description does not need to add parameter details since there are none to document.

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 function: 'Get list of network requests' uses a specific verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish from the closely related sibling tool browser_get_network_logs, which likely serves a similar purpose, so it falls short of a 5.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_get_network_logs. The description lacks any context about use cases, prerequisites, or when to prefer another tool.

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