get_network_logs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and delivers comprehensive behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states side effects ('optionally clears cached logs when clear is true'), prerequisites, return format ('JSON array'), rate limits ('none'), and operational constraints. This goes well beyond what the input schema provides about parameters.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (side effects, prerequisites, returns, rate limits, usage, alternatives) in a single paragraph. Every sentence adds value, though some redundancy exists between the description and schema (e.g., filtering concepts appear in both).

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 tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description provides exceptional completeness. It covers behavioral aspects, prerequisites, return format, usage scenarios, and alternatives. The only minor gap is not explicitly describing the JSON structure returned, but this is reasonable given the complexity.

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%, providing complete parameter documentation. The description doesn't add specific parameter semantics beyond what's already in the schema, but it does provide the overall context of filtering capabilities. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting for parameters.

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 verb ('retrieves') and resource ('intercepted HTTP/REST requests and WebSocket frames from network activity cache') with specific scope. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on network logs rather than other browser interactions like DOM inspection or console logs.

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 ('audit API calls, debug network issues, inspect WebSocket traffic') and provides named alternatives ('browser DevTools Network tab, HAR file export'). The prerequisites section ('requires active Chrome tab with network monitoring enabled') further clarifies usage context.

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