remote_spy_start

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses a key failure mode (error if hooks missing) but does not explain the logging lifecycle, such as whether logging is persistent, how to stop it, or what happens to collected logs. This is partial transparency.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and no filler. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 simple start-command tool, the description covers the core action and a failure condition, but the unexplained 'filter' parameter and lack of annotation context leave gaps. It is minimally viable but not fully self-sufficient.

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 only parameter 'filter' is completely undocumented in the schema and description. Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but does not, adding no meaning beyond the parameter name itself.

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 a specific action (start logging) and resource (outgoing remote traffic), distinguishing it from sibling tools like remote_spy_stop and remote_spy_dump. The verb is precise and the scope is unambiguous.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and verb 'start', but the description does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like remote_spy_stop or remote_spy_dump. It does mention the prerequisite of hooks, which is a useful condition, but no explicit guidance or exclusions are provided.

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