network_capture_full

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

Annotations indicate non-readonly, non-destructive, non-idempotent, non-open-world, which align with a tool that starts/stops captures. The description adds key behavioral details: bodies over maxBodyBytes are omitted with reason='over_cap'. This goes beyond annotations.

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, highly concise, front-loaded with the core purpose and actions. Every word earns its place; no redundancy.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description does not explain the structure of getLogs results (e.g., entries, pagination via cursor/limit). It leaves the return format unspecified, which for a complex tool with multiple actions is a gap.

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?

All 6 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds context about the cap behavior affecting maxBodyBytes and mentions actions, but does not provide additional detail beyond the schema for most parameters. Minor value added.

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 tool captures network requests with response bodies (capped) and enumerates the four possible actions (start, stop, getLogs, clear). It distinguishes itself from the sibling network_capture_lite by implying this is the 'full' version with body capture.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like network_capture_lite. It lists actions and options but lacks context such as prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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