extract_objects

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

Annotations provide idempotentHint and destructiveHint. Description adds that output_dir is created if empty, but misses behavioral details like tshark dependency, overwriting policy, or return format. Does not contradict 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?

Description is two sentences plus a clear argument list. No filler, front-loaded purpose, efficient structure.

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?

No output schema; description lacks return value explanation. Also missing runtime dependencies (tshark) and default protocol value (http). Adequate but not fully complete for agent 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 coverage is 0%, so description compensates by explaining file_path (PCAP/PCAPNG), protocol options (http, smb, dicom, imf, tftp), and output_dir (created if empty). Adds meaning absent from schema.

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 files from HTTP/SMB/DICOM/IMF/TFTP streams using tshark', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like follow_tcp_stream and extract_credentials.

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 lists supported protocols and input/output parameters, implying when to use (file extraction from streams). However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives among siblings.

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