capture

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses important behavioral traits: the start-before-request timing constraint, tab-bound monitoring that does not migrate, that 'get' returns an inline overview while full data lands in a JSON file for 'read', and that 'stop' clears the capture. These are meaningful operational details.

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 compact and front-loaded with a summary ('三合一') followed by per-action groupings, each earning its place. No redundant sentences beyond the heading. Dense but efficient.

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 three-mode capture tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the critical timing, scoping, and result-handling details an agent needs. It could mention permissions or how the JSON file path is obtained, but the core operational picture is complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters including the enum and method filter defaults. The description adds only a brief parenthetical about the overview/JSON-file split for 'get' at the top level, which is marginal beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a clear verb+resource: network capture with three modes (start/get/stop) broken out explicitly. It is distinguishable from siblings like run_cdp or execute_js, though the exact relationship to browser-attached siblings is not explained. Purpose is clear without being fully differentiated.

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 gives clear sequencing guidance: 'start' must be called before triggering the request, and monitoring is bound to the current tab rather than following the pointer. It does not name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the timing and scoping instructions are actionable.

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