wireshark_extract_credentials

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool modifies data, requires authorization, or has side effects. The return type is mentioned but not behavioral traits like read-only nature.

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?

Description is short and well-structured with Args/Returns/Example. No redundant information, front-loaded with purpose.

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?

Missing usage guidelines and behavioral transparency crucial for a security tool. Does not confirm read-only nature or prerequisites. Output schema exists but description could still guide on expected findings format.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds basic meaning ('Path to capture file') but lacks details on file format, existence requirements, or remote access. Baseline for single param with zero coverage is low, but minimal value added.

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 tool scans for plaintext credentials (HTTP Basic Auth, FTP, Telnet) from a pcap file, which is specific and distinguishes it from siblings like wireshark_extract_http_requests or wireshark_security_audit.

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. The description does not mention when-not-to-use or provide criteria for selection among siblings.

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