browser_get_network_logs

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It describes the return data but does not clarify whether logs persist, if the action is read-only, or if sessions must be active. Some operational details are missing, making it adequate but not comprehensive.

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 and well-structured: a one-line summary, a bullet-like list of returned fields, and a clear parameter list. No extraneous information, and the most important content appears first.

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 five optional parameters, detailed documentation, and an output schema. The description covers the main return types and parameter uses, but could clarify how filters interact (e.g., AND logic) or whether url_filter supports regex. Overall, it is nearly complete.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description includes detailed parameter explanations with examples (e.g., url_filter: 'api', method: 'GET'). This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema, fully compensating for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 retrieves network request logs from a browser session, specifying the exact data returned (URL, method, status, headers, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_get_images or browser_get_response_body.

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 context on when to use the tool (discovering APIs, debugging, performance analysis) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or contrast with alternatives. It is clear but lacks exclusion criteria.

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