live_capture

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

The description discloses that data is written to a temporary pcap that is deleted after preview, which adds value beyond annotations. Annotations indicate non-destructive and non-readOnly, and the description clarifies the transient nature.

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?

Two sentences that are clear and to the point. No wasted words, but could be slightly more structured (e.g., separating purpose from behavior).

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 description explains the tool's output is a preview but does not describe the preview format, which is a gap since there is no output schema. It covers the core behavior but leaves details unspecified.

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 100% for all 4 parameters, so the schema already explains them. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it captures live network traffic from an interface, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like read_pcap (existing captures) and list_interfaces (listing interfaces).

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 usage context (capturing live traffic) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. Siblings like read_pcap and summarize_pcap provide contrast, but direct guidance is lacking.

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