load_capture_file

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It states the operation is loading a file for analysis, which is a non-destructive read, but it does not explicitly mention that it is read-only, any permission requirements, behavior on missing/invalid files, or side effects. The core behavior is transparent but lacks depth.

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, well-structured sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded, and it includes relevant format details. No wasted words.

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 is minimal and does not specify what happens after loading, such as whether it returns a capture handle or makes the capture the active one. Given no output schema, this missing workflow detail leaves an agent uncertain about how to reference the loaded capture with subsequent analysis tools. It is adequate for the core action but not fully complete for the 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% as the path parameter is described in the schema. The description adds context about how the file was created (saveCaptureData() or DevTools) and its purpose, which enriches the schema's basic description. It does not contradict or duplicate unnecessarily.

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 states a specific verb ('Load') with a clear resource ('WebGPU Inspector capture file') and provides formats and origin. It clearly implies use for analysis, and the scope distinguishes it from sibling tools like capture_frames (which creates captures) and list_captures (which lists existing ones).

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it should be used when you have a capture file on disk, nor does it contrast with tools like list_captures or capture_frames. The context is implied but not explicit.

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