list_network_requests

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read nature is established. The description adds useful scoping context about target page and navigation window, but does not disclose ordering, pagination behavior, or what happens to requests across navigations beyond what the schema's includePreservedRequests parameter already hints at.

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, front-loaded sentence that names the action, resource, target, and time scope with no wasted words. Every phrase earns its place.

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?

For a read-only listing tool with fully documented parameters and a readOnly annotation, this description plus the schema covers the essential invocation needs. It does not describe the return shape or ordering, but 'lists ... requests' plus the schema provides enough guidance for correct use.

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%, so all five parameters, including the required pageId and filter options, are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('Lists') and resource ('network requests for the target page') and adds a temporal scope ('since the last navigation'). It is clear about what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling get_network_request, which likely retrieves a single request.

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 conveys a clear use context: listing recent network activity for a page after navigation. However, it does not state when to prefer an alternative such as get_network_request, nor does it mention any exclusions or conditions that would make another tool more appropriate.

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