wireshark_export_objects

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

No annotations exist, and the description omits behavioral details such as permissions, side effects, or whether overwriting occurs. For a file extraction tool, more disclosure is needed.

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 efficiently structured: a summary sentence, Args list, Returns, and an example. No unnecessary text. Could be slightly more concise.

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?

Given 3 required parameters and an output schema (context signals), the description covers basic usage. However, it does not explain the output format or behavior for edge cases, leaving some gaps.

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%, so the description is the sole source. It lists parameters and gives protocol types but lacks depth for pcap_file and dest_dir. Provides some value but not comprehensive.

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 'Extract embedded files from traffic (HTTP, SMB, TFTP, etc.)', specifying a verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling extraction tools like extract_credentials or extract_dns_queries.

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 versus alternatives, such as other extraction tools. No 'when not to use' or context provided.

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