wireshark_capture

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds minimal extra behavioral context beyond capture_filter and ring_buffer syntax, not covering potential file overwrites or permission needs.

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 very short with no superfluous content. Two sentences front-load the purpose and parameter hints efficiently.

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, 6 parameters, and 0% schema coverage, the description lacks essential details about required parameters (interface, output_file) and behavior (e.g., file overwrite, capture termination). Incomplete for safe invocation.

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 0%; the description provides syntax examples for capture_filter and ring_buffer, adding value for 2 of 6 parameters. However, interface, output_file, packet_count, and duration_seconds remain undescribed.

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 'Capture live network traffic', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools that analyze or process existing captures.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The name and context imply it's for starting a new capture, but no exclusion criteria or alternative referrals are given.

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