wireshark_extract_smtp_emails

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool extracts metadata and returns JSON, but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or performance characteristics. It mentions 'JSON error' but no details.

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 concise: a one-line summary, defined args/returns, and an example. No extraneous text; information is front-loaded.

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 the output schema exists, return details are unnecessary. The description covers the purpose and parameters adequately for a two-parameter tool. Additional info on error handling or file type support could improve completeness.

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%, but the description adds meaning: pcap_file is 'Path to capture file' and limit is 'Maximum emails to extract (default: 50)'. This goes beyond type-only schema, though format constraints (e.g., valid file path) are missing.

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 it extracts SMTP email metadata (sender, recipient, subject, mail server info). This distinguishes it from sibling extract tools like wireshark_extract_credentials or wireshark_extract_dns_queries by specifying the protocol.

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?

The description provides an example call but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool vs alternatives. It lacks 'when-not' conditions or prerequisites for effective use.

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