analyze_websocket_messages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool is local-only and does not use an LLM, which is helpful, but misses other behavioral traits like potential side effects, performance impact, or the nature of the clustering output.

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 very short (8 words), which is concise but at the expense of necessary detail. It front-loads the key action, but critical information (parameter meaning, output nature) is missing, making it inefficient for agent understanding.

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 the low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description should be fairly complete but is not. It fails to describe the return value, the clustering algorithm's implications, or how results can be interpreted. A better description would specify what 'clusters' means and the format of the results.

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 single parameter 'wsid' has no description in either schema or tool description. Schema coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain what value to provide or its purpose, leaving the agent completely in the dark.

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 states 'Cluster frames by byte-signature heuristic', which gives a specific verb and noun, but 'frames' is ambiguous without referencing WebSocket explicitly. It somewhat distinguishes from siblings like get_websocket_message by implying analysis rather than retrieval, but the differentiation is weak.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The mention 'v1 local-only; no LLM' hints at limitations but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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