browser_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 return type (base64 PNG), prerequisites, and optional selector behavior. However, it omits the tab_id parameter and does not mention potential failure conditions or whether the screenshot is viewport or full-page, leaving behavioral disclosure incomplete.

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 well-organized with a clear summary, a prerequisite line, bulleted use cases, and an args section. It is compact and efficient, though slightly longer than the minimal two-sentence standard, which is justified by the added context.

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?

The description covers core usage and output, but misses `tab_id` semantics and does not clarify viewport vs. full-page capture beyond the selector note. Given the output schema exists and no annotations are present, the description leaves some gaps but is mostly adequate.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning for `selector` (CSS selector, optional, full-page if omitted) and `session_name` (default value). However, it entirely omits `tab_id`, leaving one of three parameters undocumented, so compensation for the coverage gap is partial.

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 takes a screenshot of the current page and returns a base64-encoded PNG. The verb 'Take' plus resource 'screenshot' is specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like browser_get_dom or browser_get_text by focusing on visual capture.

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 concrete use cases (verifying page state, checking for bot detection, documenting evidence) and states the prerequisite that browser_open and browser_go must have been called first. This gives clear when-to-use context, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools for non-visual needs.

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