list_captures

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses an important inclusion/exclusion behavior: only live captures and explicitly loaded capture files are listed, not arbitrary capture files. This is meaningful and goes beyond the tool name, though it doesn't mention output format or side effects, which are unlikely for a listing operation.

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, focused sentence. The parenthetical clarification is compact and adds necessary scope information without redundancy.

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 and parameterless, so invocation is trivial, but there is no output schema and no mention of what fields or format the returned capture list will have. The description is sufficient for selection but not fully complete for an agent that needs to consume the result in a downstream step.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond the baseline. The description does not add parameter information, but none is needed.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'List captures currently available to analyze' and clarifies the two inclusion categories: live captures and explicitly loaded capture files. This distinguishes it from siblings like load_capture_file and get_capture_summary.

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 phrase 'currently available to analyze' implies this is the tool to call when you need an inventory of loaded or captured data, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as load_capture_file or get_capture_summary. No when-not or alternative-naming guidance is provided.

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