Upload Screenshot

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

Annotations indicate it is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive, but the description adds no further behavioral details such as side effects, the multi-step nature ('reserve, upload, commit'), or idempotency. It fails to disclose important traits beyond the basic action.

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, consisting of a single sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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?

Given two required parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It lacks guidance on usage context, parameter details, expected output, and does not fully explain the 'reserve, upload, and commit' process. An agent would need additional context to use this 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate but only vaguely hints at parameter meanings ('local screenshot file' for filePath, 'existing screenshot set' for screenshotSetId). No details on format, size limits, or constraints are provided.

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 uses specific verbs ('Reserve, upload, and commit') and a clear resource ('one local screenshot file to an existing screenshot set'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like asc_create_screenshot_set (creates a set) and asc_delete_screenshot_resource (deletes a screenshot).

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 the tool requires an existing screenshot set, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like asc_create_screenshot_set or when not to use it. No exclusion criteria or context is provided.

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