Screenshot game

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

The description states the tool optionally saves a PNG to disk, which is a write operation, contradicting the annotation readOnlyHint: true. This is a serious inconsistency that undermines transparency. The description also lacks details on behavior when multiple games are running or what the embedded image format is.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the action, and every sentence adds value. No redundant or filler content.

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 tool with 3 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential preconditions and options. It explains the return value as an image and the optional save. However, it could be more complete by specifying the image format or how the inline embed is represented, but overall it provides sufficient context for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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. The description adds some context (e.g., 'return the image inline' for embed, 'defaults to a temp file' for output, and 'optional when exactly one game is running' for game_id), but these are already present in the schema or are minor clarifications.

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 captures the current frame of a running game and returns an image, with optional save to disk. It specifies the precondition (game launched with godot_run live=true, non-headless), which adds clarity. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'game_screenshot', so it misses full marks.

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 implies usage when a screenshot of a running game is needed, and notes the precondition (non-headless, live=true). It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like 'game_screenshot', so guidance is present but limited.

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