screenshot_monitor

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, lowering the disclosure bar. However, the single most important behavioral fact for a capture tool — where the image is written (path, filename, clipboard?) — is absent, and readOnlyHint=false suggests a side effect the description never explains.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and the scope, with no filler or restated title.

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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the description must carry the burden of explaining the result, and it does not say where the screenshot goes or what is returned. It is adequate to invoke but incomplete for predicting the outcome.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; the description does contribute the one meaningful semantic fact, that the target is the focused monitor rather than any other screen.

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?

States a specific verb ('Take a screenshot') and a precisely scoped resource ('the currently focused monitor'), which implicitly contrasts with the sibling variants screenshot_full, screenshot_region and screenshot_window. It stops short of naming those siblings, so the distinction is inferred rather than explicit.

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 phrase 'currently focused monitor' implies when to choose this over the full/region/window variants, but the description never states an explicit alternative or a when-not condition. An agent can guess the routing but is not told it.

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