wireshark_filter_save

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

Annotations include destructiveHint: true, and the description says 'save to a new file', which implies creating a new file (destructive). However, it does not clarify that the original file remains unchanged (not in-place modification) nor mention potential overwriting behavior. No contradictions with annotations.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the core action. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., split into action and details) without adding length.

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 complexity of Wireshark display filters (syntax, operators) and numerous sibling tools, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what a display filter is or how to format it, what output file format is used, or any side effects. No output schema exists to compensate.

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?

Input schema has 3 required parameters with 0% description coverage. The description only mentions parameter names implicitly ('input_file, output_file, display_filter'), but provides no additional semantics such as expected file paths, formats, or display filter syntax. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of detail.

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 'Filter packets from a pcap and save to a new file using a Wireshark display filter', which precisely identifies the verb (filter/save), resource (pcap file), and distinguishes from siblings like wireshark_editcap_split (which splits by time) or wireshark_merge_pcaps (which merges).

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or limitations. However, the purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer its use for filtering, but lacks exclusionary context given the large sibling list.

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