chrome_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 mentions the output format (PNG) but omits critical behaviors such as what 'selected page' means, how tab selection works, whether it captures full page or viewport, and what is returned (file path, etc.). The description is too vague for an agent to anticipate side effects.

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, compact sentence that is easy to parse and front-loaded. It wastes no words, but its brevity contributes to under-specification. As a concise statement, it earns a high score, though not perfect because it omits essential 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?

With 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the tool is complex enough that a full description is necessary. This description provides only a minimal declarative statement, lacking any handling of parameter relationships, default behaviors, or return values. It is fundamentally incomplete for an agent to use reliably.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no explanation of any of the 6 parameters. It only hints at 'selected page' without clarifying the roles of tabId, urlContains, titleContains, fullPage, or outputPath. The description entirely fails to compensate for the missing parameter documentation.

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 action: 'Capture a PNG screenshot of the selected page.' It identifies a specific verb (capture), resource (screenshot), and format (PNG). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like chrome_snapshot, which may also involve capturing page content.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. It is a single declarative statement without context for selection.

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