Screenshot the stage

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that this is the real renderer, requires a connected editor, depends on a userscript bridge, and that pixels are not a good substitute for values. It does not describe failure behavior or rate limits, but the key operational traits are transparent.

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?

Four sentences, each earning its place: what the tool does, how/where it works, the precondition, and explicit alternatives. The most important identifying information is front-loaded, with no redundancy or vague 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 zero-parameter screenshot tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it tells the agent the output type (PNG), the runtime context (live TurboWarp Desktop editor), the required setup (load/run first), and compares itself to relevant siblings. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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 zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to add to the input schema. The description appropriately focuses on preconditions and output format instead of parameter details.

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 and resource: 'Capture a PNG of the live stage from a connected TurboWarp Desktop editor.' It also names the mechanism (live-reload bridge + userscript) and distinguishes itself from the sibling screenshot_jpeg by specifying PNG format.

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 explicitly provides preconditions ('load and run the project there first via save_project/run_project') and gives clear alternative routing: prefer vm_state for logic checks, and use screenshot_jpeg for a much smaller payload. This is exemplary when-to-use guidance.

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