astrax_ver_pantalla

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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description carries the full burden and largely meets it: it discloses the return format (JPEG), the 1:1 coordinate correspondence with astrax_clic, and the red-circle cursor overlay. It omits cost/latency or screen-state caveats, but the core behavioral facts an agent needs are present.

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?

Two tight lines with the output format and usefulness constraint front-loaded; every clause earns its place with no filler.

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 no-argument tool with no output schema, the description supplies the essentials: what comes back (a JPEG), how its coordinates align with other tools, and when to invoke it. Only the relationship to astrax_capturar_pantalla is left unexplained.

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 schema baseline of 4 applies. The mention of 1:1 coordinates with astrax_clic is useful operational context but is not parameter semantics.

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 — it views the screen and returns a JPEG image — and notes the coordinate mapping to astrax_clic. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling astrax_capturar_pantalla, which an agent could reasonably confuse with this tool.

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?

Gives clear positive guidance (use it to verify the result of an action) and an explicit exclusion (don't fire it blindly after every trivial step). It stops short of naming which alternative to prefer for other screenshot needs.

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