arc_start_network_monitor

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

No annotations provided; the description only says it starts monitoring. It does not disclose side effects like clearing previous data, resource usage, or whether it requires an active tab.

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?

Description is a single concise sentence, but it is too brief to cover behavioral context. Structure is acceptable given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Lacks information about when monitoring stops, whether it returns data, and how to retrieve captured requests. With no output schema and no annotations, more context is needed.

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%, so the description does not need to explain parameters. It adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, earning a baseline score.

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 'Start monitoring network requests (fetch/XHR)', specifying the action and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like arc_stop_network_monitor and arc_get_network_requests.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, when to stop, or that results can be retrieved with arc_get_network_requests.

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