get_view

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It correctly implies a read-only operation ('Get a screenshot') and explains defaults for width, height, and focus_object. However, it does not explicitly state safety (e.g., no destructive effects) or handling of edge cases like invalid view names.

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-structured with clear 'Args' and 'Returns' sections. It is concise yet complete, with no redundant information. Every sentence provides necessary detail.

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 simple screenshot tool, the description covers parameters and return value adequately. An output schema exists, so return explanation is sufficient. Minor gaps remain (e.g., error behavior, supported formats), but overall it is complete for typical use.

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%, so the description fully compensates by explaining all four parameters: view_name (with enumerated options), width and height (with defaults), and focus_object (with default). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's minimal information.

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 'Get a screenshot of the active view', which is a specific verb+resource. This purpose distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_object, delete_object, etc., as it focuses on capturing a view rather than manipulating or listing objects.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios where other tools might be more appropriate. The usage context is entirely implicit.

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