snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that a screenshot will be captured to a path, without mentioning side effects like file overwriting, device requirements, or error handling. This lacks transparency for a tool that writes to the filesystem.

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, direct sentence that immediately communicates the core action and destination. It contains no unnecessary words or repetition, making it appropriately concise and front-loaded.

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 parameters, no annotations, and no description-based explanation of return values, the description is under-specified. It leaves key parameter details and usage context unmentioned, making it incomplete for an agent to use confidently.

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 must compensate. It clarifies that output_path is an absolute local path, but provides no additional meaning for the 'device' or 'quality' parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema's field titles and types.

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 function: capturing a device screenshot to a local path. It uses a specific verb ('capture') and identifies the resource (device screenshot) and output location (absolute local path), distinguishing it from sibling tools like touch, swipe, and run_airtest_script.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites for use (e.g., connected device, permissions). Usage is only implied by the purpose, which is insufficient for selecting among sibling tools.

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