Browser Screenshot

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait: the owning app is brought to the foreground before capturing, because a hidden WebView cannot render. This is useful and beyond what annotations would provide (since there are none). However, it omits other behaviors like return format, side effects on app state, or permission requirements, which are important given no annotations exist.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, with the purpose stated first and a behavioral note second. No wasted words, and the structure is 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 three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is inadequate. It fails to explain what the output looks like (e.g., file path, base64), what each parameter does, or any prerequisites like permissions. The only useful context is the foregrounding behavior, which is not enough for safe invocation.

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 0% and the description provides no explanation of the three parameters (device, session, full_page). The agent is left to infer their meaning from names and defaults alone. Since the description does not compensate for the lack of schema descriptions, it fails to add value here.

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 states the tool takes a screenshot of page content, which is clear and specific to a browser context. It doesn't differentiate from siblings like get_screenshot or screenshot, but it does mention 'page content' and the owning app, so it's not a tautology. A clear verb and resource, but lacks explicit differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_screenshot or screenshot_path. The description only mentions a technical behavior (foregrounding the app) but doesn't advise on selection criteria, such as when to prefer this over other screenshot tools.

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