start_monitor

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

Without annotations, the description discloses that starting monitoring launches a new browser instance and captures API/form data by default. It doesn't elaborate on side effects like resource usage, return values, or interaction with the CDP port, but the schema covers some parameters.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and default behavior, with no wasted words.

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?

The description is adequate for a start action; it explains the core purpose and default filter behavior. It could mention that monitoring requires stopping later, but the sibling stop_monitor implies this, and the schema handles parameter 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?

The schema already provides exhaustive descriptions for all 3 parameters, so the description's mention of default capture and 'all' adds high-level guidance. This supplements the schema's content type filter explanation.

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 action 'Start network monitoring' with a new browser instance, and specifies the default capture scope. It differentiates from sibling tools like stop_monitor and get_recent_requests by its verb and resource.

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?

It explains the default behavior and instructs to use 'all' to include static files, providing clear context on how to invoke the filter. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, though the sibling names imply roles.

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