chrome_screenshot

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

The description discloses the return format (base64 image), which is useful. However, it does not mention any side effects, prerequisites, or what happens if no page is loaded. With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden and provides only minimal behavioral context without contradiction.

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 one short sentence that front-loads the action and includes the key output detail. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or extraneous information.

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 five optional parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It tells what the tool does and returns, but does not explain the effect of options like full_page or selector, nor any limitations or failure modes. The schema covers parameters, but the tool-level context feels thin.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the 'current page' context, implying the active tab, but does not elaborate on parameter behavior beyond what the schema already states. It neither enriches nor undermines the parameter documentation.

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 verb 'Take a screenshot' and the resource 'current page', and the parenthetical 'returns base64 image' adds a key output detail. This uniquely distinguishes it from sibling tools like chrome_dump_dom or chrome_navigate.

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?

Usage is implied: capture what is currently visible. There is no explicit mention of when to use it versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites like requiring an active tab or connected browser. This is acceptable for a straightforward tool but lacks direct guidance.

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