browser_network_errors

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, what happens to the captured list after calling, or the effect of the 'clear' parameter. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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, focused sentence that immediately communicates the tool's purpose. It is concise and front-loaded, though it omits important details.

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?

Given no output schema, no annotations, and 2 parameters with no explanation, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain the 'id' parameter, the format of returned failures, or the behavior of 'clear'. Does not provide enough information 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?

The input schema has two parameters (id, clear) with no description. The tool description adds no meaning to these parameters; 'id' is unexplained and 'clear' is not mentioned. With 0% schema coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

Description clearly states it returns captured network request failures and gives examples (404s, CORS errors). The verb 'Return' and resource 'network request failures' are specific. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like browser_console_logs which also deal with errors.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it does, without context about when it's appropriate or when to avoid it.

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