List Network Calls

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It notes the return format is XML summaries and implies read-only by listing calls, but does not explicitly state read-only behavior, side effects, or performance implications. Adequate but not thorough.

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 cover purpose, filter options, usage context, and return format. Every word is informative with no filler.

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?

While the description gives usage context and return format, it lacks details about the response structure (e.g., fields in each XML summary) and pagination specifics. Given the complexity (9 params, no output schema, no annotations), more completeness is needed.

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%, so baseline 3. The description adds value by providing a usage example (status_min=400) and summarizing filter types, which aids understanding beyond the 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 tool lists HTTP requests and responses and names specific filter criteria (resource type, method, status code, URL pattern). It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'search_network_calls' but the verb 'list' implies a non-search operation.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'after navigate or an action to inspect API traffic, confirm a request fired, or find failing calls' with a concrete example. Does not state when not to use or alternatives, but the context is clear.

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