Screenshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output being base64-encoded, which is useful, but omits critical behavioral details: whether it requires the page to be loaded, whether it captures only visible content or the full page, any size or performance implications, and whether it modifies browser state. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the core action and return format with zero waste. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 annotations, no output schema, and a simple parameter set, the description is too sparse. It fails to disclose behavioral traits like page-load requirements, full-page vs. viewport capture, or error conditions, which are essential for correct invocation in a browser automation context.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters and their defaults fully. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides. A baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb ('Take a screenshot') and resource ('current page or a specific element'), and it clearly names the return format ('base64-encoded image'). This distinguishes it from siblings like browser_snapshot (likely DOM snapshot) and browser_save_as_pdf (PDF output).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as browser_snapshot or browser_save_as_pdf. It neither states when it is appropriate nor when it should be avoided. An agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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