Skip to main content
Glama

screenshot

Read-only

Capture an Android device screen as PNG image content, or save the PNG to the artifacts directory and return its file path for QA review.

Instructions

Capture the screen as PNG image content, or save it and return the file path.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "screenshot"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
saveNoSave a PNG under the artifacts dir and return its path, not the image.
serialNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description usefully clarifies the two return shapes (inline PNG content vs a file path), which matters because there is no output schema, but it says nothing about permissions, device state, or failure behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single tight sentence front-loads the primary output (PNG image content) and then the alternative (save and return path). Nothing is wasted, though the structure could have separated output format from mode selection more clearly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter, non-destructive capture tool with no output schema, the description covers the key decision (inline image vs saved path) and the return format. Only the device-targeting semantics remain thin, and those are partly covered by the schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 50%: save is documented in the schema, and serial is documented there as 'Device serial from list_devices. Optional when one device is online.' The description restates the save behavior but adds no meaning about the serial or which device is captured, so it does not compensate for the coverage gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb and resource ('Capture the screen as PNG image content') and states the two output modes. It does not name or differentiate itself from siblings like dump_ui, so an agent must infer that this captures pixels rather than the UI hierarchy.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It implies the choice between returning an image and saving to disk ('or save it and return the file path'), which maps to the save flag. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance relative to dump_ui or other inspection tools, and no stated prerequisites such as a connected device.

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