get-full-snapshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool captures 'all visible content' but doesn't specify details like whether it requires an active browser session, how it handles dynamic content, potential performance impacts, or what the output format looks like. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely interacts with web pages.

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, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose without redundancy. It's front-loaded with the main action and resource, making it easy to parse. However, it could be slightly more concise by avoiding the parenthetical elaboration, which adds minor verbosity.

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?

Given the tool's likely complexity in capturing web page snapshots, the description is insufficient. With no annotations, no output schema, and minimal behavioral details, it fails to provide enough context for effective use. It doesn't explain what 'complete snapshot' entails, how it differs from siblings, or what the agent should expect as a result, leaving critical gaps.

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 has 0 parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters to document. The description appropriately doesn't add unnecessary parameter details, aligning with the empty input schema. A baseline score of 4 is applied as it doesn't need to compensate for any parameter gaps.

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's purpose with specific verbs ('Get a complete snapshot') and resources ('page including all visible content'), making it easy to understand what it does. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-full-dom' or 'get-text-snapshot', which likely serve similar but distinct purposes.

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 minimal guidance on when to use this tool, only mentioning it's 'for understanding the full context'. It doesn't specify when to choose this over alternatives like 'get-text-snapshot' or 'get-screenshot', nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions, leaving usage unclear.

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