take_screenshot

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds substantial behavioral context beyond that: the file is persisted under .mcp/godot-runtime/screenshots/ and survives stop_project, warnings are emitted for non-fatal runtime errors, and it errors when there is no session or the bridge times out. This is rich disclosure for a read tool.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action followed by mode semantics, persistence location, and error conditions. It is dense and somewhat long, but nearly every clause conveys actionable information, so little is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, and the description still clarifies the return payload (inline image block, saved path/size, previewPath/previewSize, warnings) and failure modes. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, and the description exceeds it by explaining what each responseMode actually produces (preview saves the full PNG but returns a bounded inline preview; path_only returns no image) and by justifying the full mode. It adds rationale and consequences beyond the schema's terse enum docs.

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: 'Capture a PNG of the running viewport.' No sibling tool captures images, so it is unambiguously distinguishable, and the subject (running viewport) scopes it precisely.

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 mode-selection guidance, notably 'full ... use for small text or pixel-level inspection', which tells the agent when a given mode is appropriate. It stops short of naming an alternative tool or stating when to avoid screenshots entirely, so it is strong context rather than full when/when-not routing.

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