wireshark_decrypt_wpa

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

The description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the annotation readOnlyHint: true. It fails to mention what happens with incorrect passphrases, whether the output is decrypted packets, or that the tool reads a pcap file. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotation.

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, well-structured sentence that is front-loaded with a tag. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or waste.

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?

For a tool with 4 parameters, no output schema, and numerous siblings, the description is too minimal. It omits vital context: the tool operates on a pcap file, requires a WPA handshake, and its output format. The agent cannot fully understand the tool's purpose or use it effectively.

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%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies the purpose of the passphrase and SSID parameters, but completely ignores pcap_file (required) and display_filter. This is insufficient to guide parameter usage.

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 that the tool decrypts WPA/WPA2 traffic using a passphrase and optional SSID, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like wireshark_decrypt_tls. The verb 'Decrypt' and resource 'WPA/WPA2 traffic' are specific and unambiguous.

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 such as wireshark_decrypt_tls or wireshark_verify_ssl_decryption. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or context for selection.

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