Computer Capture Monitor

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden and does well: it makes clear this is a non-mutating single-display capture and discloses the valid index range. It omits what happens with an out-of-range index and what the capture returns, which are the remaining behavioral gaps.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope, then alternatives, then the discovery helper. Every sentence earns its place with no repetition of the title or name.

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 one-parameter read-only capture tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, sibling routing, and value discovery adequately. Error behavior for an invalid monitor index is the only substantive omission.

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 0% and the single 'monitor' parameter has no schema description, but the description compensates by defining it as a physical display index in the 1..N range and directing the agent to computer_display_overview to enumerate valid values. The only missing piece is explicit mention of the default of 1.

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 and resource ('Screenshot ONE physical monitor') and explicitly bounds the scope to a single display in the 1..N range, contrasting it with computer_screenshot's whole virtual desktop. An agent can distinguish it from every sibling without opening a schema.

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?

Names both the alternative it replaces (computer_screenshot for the full desktop) and the condition that selects this tool (multi-monitor zoom on one display), plus a pointer to computer_display_overview for discovering valid display indices. Nothing is left to inference.

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