wireshark_detect_exfiltration

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

Annotations indicate read-only (readOnlyHint=true) which aligns with detection. Description adds specific behavioral traits: looks for large outbound transfers, DNS length anomalies, non-standard ports. No contradictions detected.

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?

Single sentence with front-loaded '[Anomaly]' category. Every word is informative; no redundancy or filler.

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?

Lacks details on output format or result interpretation, which is important for a detection tool. However, given sibling tools have similarly sparse descriptions and no output schema exists, it is minimally adequate for basic usage.

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%, and the tool description provides no additional meaning for parameters 'pcap_file' or 'limit'. Agent receives no guidance on how to use parameters beyond schema types and defaults.

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?

Clearly specifies the tool detects data exfiltration with concrete examples (large outbound transfers, DNS length anomalies, non-standard ports). Distinguishes from sibling tools like wireshark_detect_dns_tunnel and wireshark_detect_port_scan by focusing on exfiltration patterns.

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?

Implies use for exfiltration detection but no explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives like wireshark_detect_beaconing or wireshark_detect_dns_tunnel. Does not mention exclusions or prerequisites.

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