Capture bounded packet metadata

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds 'non-persistent' and 'generated restricted filter,' which are behavioral details not captured by the annotations, giving the agent a clearer sense of what the tool does and its side effects.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the core action and key constraints without wasted words. It is concise, though it sacrifices completeness.

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?

The tool has 8 parameters and no output schema, but the description fails to explain what the capture returns, what 'bounded' means, or how parameters map to the filter. This is inadequate for an agent to use the tool correctly and safely.

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 and 8 parameters, the description provides no explanation of how parameters like client_ip, port, domain, or protocol shape the generated filter. This is a critical gap for a tool with so many parameters.

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 runs a packet capture, which is a specific verb+resource, and the title adds 'bounded packet metadata.' However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like observe_client or inspect_flow, though 'non-persistent' and 'generated restricted filter' hint at a unique approach.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'explicitly requested' implies on-demand use, but there are no explicit scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions provided.

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