harvest_data

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses side effects: writing to ARCHIVE, switching CACHE, clearing Charles session, and invalidating keyword auth. This is comprehensive and allows the agent to anticipate all behavioral impacts.

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 well-organized with sections and bullet points, making it easy to read. It could be slightly more concise, but the structure is effective for conveying detailed behavior.

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 that an output schema exists, the description appropriately focuses on behavior and side effects. It does not describe return values, but that is acceptable. The description covers all necessary usage context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 0% but the description thoroughly explains the single boolean parameter 'fresh_start', detailing both default and alternative behaviors. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's minimal definition.

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 syncs incremental traffic from Charles and creates a checkpoint. It distinguishes two modes (fresh_start=False/True) and explains their effects. This is specific and resource-oriented, differentiating it from sibling filtering tools.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool, including typical usage before switching analysis targets. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives like load_checkpoint.

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