screenshot

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions capture modes but omits critical details: what happens if both fullPage and selector are set?, file format, overwrite behavior, return value (if any), error handling. The brief description fails to convey the tool's complete behavioral profile.

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?

Very concise single sentence, front-loading the main verb and listing options. No wasted words, but may be too brief for a tool with three parameters and potential interactions.

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 three parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the main functionality but lacks explanation of parameter interaction (e.g., how to achieve each mode via specific parameter settings) and does not mention return value or side effects.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds grouping of modes but does not provide additional semantics beyond the schema. For example, it doesn't clarify parameter precedence or how to combine path with other parameters.

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?

Clearly states the tool captures screenshots of a page, listing three modes (full page, element, visible area). This differentiates it from sibling tools which are all navigation or interaction actions. However, it does not explicitly contrast with potential overlapping tools (none in siblings) or provide deeper specificity.

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?

Implies when to use each mode (fullPage for full scroll, selector for element, none for visible area), but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. No discussion of prerequisites, file path handling, or conflict resolution between parameters.

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