list_network_requests

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

readOnlyHint is already true, so the read-only nature is covered by annotations. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: the scope is limited to the currently selected page and only since the last navigation. No hidden side effects or exclusions are disclosed.

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 sentence, immediately identifies the action and resource, and contains no superfluous wording or repetition of schema information.

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?

With full schema coverage, a read-only annotation, and a precise scope statement, the description is sufficient for an agent to decide when and how to invoke the tool. The list return type is implied by 'List all requests,' and no output schema 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?

The input schema describes all four parameters with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to add parameter details. It does not go beyond the schema, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema is complete.

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 'List' and names the resource 'network requests' with a clear scope: 'for the currently selected page since the last navigation.' This directly distinguishes it from the sibling 'get_network_request' (single request retrieval).

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 context is clear: it operates on the currently selected page and covers requests since the last navigation. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though the sibling distinction is implied.

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