follow_udp

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true (safe read) and openWorldHint=false. The description adds that it returns 'ASCII payload', but does not warn about non-ASCII data handling or behavior if stream not found. Some context beyond annotations is provided, 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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no waste. Slightly too brief for full context, but effective for a simple tool.

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 is simple with 2 parameters, no output schema, and clear annotations. The description covers the core functionality, but lacks mention of limitations (e.g., ASCII-only payload) and how it fits into the larger pcap analysis workflow.

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 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning: 'by index' reinforces stream_id, but no additional format or usage details beyond 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 the action ('Follow'), the resource ('UDP stream'), and the output ('ASCII payload'). It distinguishes from sibling 'follow_tcp' by specifying UDP.

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 implies use for UDP streams, but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like 'follow_tcp' or provide when-to-use guidance. No exclusions or preconditions are mentioned.

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