Find errors

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses error definitions, row structure including event ID and responseBodyPreview, and optionality of bundleId. It explains behavior but omits pagination or ordering 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?

Four well-structured sentences front-load the main purpose, then detail error definitions and row format. No redundant or unnecessary information.

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?

The description covers error definitions, row structure, and parameter context well. Missing explicit output format and ordering direction, but overall adequate for a 3-param tool with no output schema.

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 100%, and the description adds context: bundleId's optionality when one bundle loaded, includeWarnings meaning, and references to load_bundle. It doesn't add to limit beyond schema.

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 returns network and console errors in time order, defines each error type explicitly, and distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning event IDs for get_network_request/get_console_event.

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 context on when to use (for chronological error list) and hints at alternative tools (detail calls via event ID), but lacks explicit don't-use guidance or comparison with search_network.

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