run_display_filter

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Bounded' hints at output or execution limits, and 'extract named fields' describes the core operation. However, it does not explain what happens on invalid filters, whether the capture is modified, or how results are limited.

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 with no filler. Every word contributes to the tool's core purpose, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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 zero parameter descriptions and no annotations, this description is too thin to fully equip an agent. It conveys the general action but omits prerequisite knowledge about the path, filter syntax, field extraction format, and behavioral constraints beyond the vague word 'bounded'.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It connects 'named fields' to field extraction, but it does not clarify that 'path' is a capture file path, how display_filter syntax should be formed, or the format of fields_csv beyond what the parameter name already suggests.

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 uses specific verbs ('Run', 'extract'), a clear resource ('Wireshark display filter'), and a clear outcome ('extract named fields'). This distinguishes it from the sibling tools, which are specialized analyses like inspect_dns_queries or detect_suspicious_patterns.

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 state when to prefer this tool over sibling alternatives, nor does it give exclusions or conditions. 'Bounded' implies a scoped query, but no explicit guidance is provided about using it for custom field extraction versus specialized sibling tools.

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