interceptor_browser_get_network_field

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Get', implying a read operation, but does not mention whether it requires prior capture, what happens if the field_id is invalid, or any side effects. The default max_chars is in schema but not described. Missing critical behavioral context.

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?

A single sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. No redundant or irrelevant information. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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?

Without an output schema, the description should clarify the return format (e.g., string value, JSON). It mentions 'full header field value' but doesn't specify if it's the raw header line or just the value. Error scenarios are not covered. Adequate for a simple getter but could be more thorough given the tool's role in a complex proxy workflow.

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 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain what constitutes a 'full header field value' or how to interpret the returned value. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already defines the parameters.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'one full header field value from proxy-captured traffic', with the method 'by field_id'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like interceptor_browser_list_network_fields which lists fields, and other tools that capture traffic. The purpose is specific and actionable.

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 (e.g., when to get a single field vs. listing all fields). No mention of prerequisites, such as having captured traffic first, or when not to use this tool. The description is purely declarative without usage context.

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