get_viewport_screenshot

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the read-only nature. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotation: the requirement for a Blender UI and the output format (PNG). No contradiction with annotations exists.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the action, target, format, and a key constraint with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a zero-parameter tool.

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 simple 0-parameter tool with both an output schema and readOnly annotation, the description provides the core action, output format, and an environmental prerequisite. It is complete enough for selection and invocation, though it could be slightly more explicit about what viewport it captures.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and the input schema is empty, with 100% description coverage. Per the rubric, a 0-parameter tool receives a baseline of 4; the description does not need to add parameter information.

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 a specific verb 'Tangkap' (capture) and names the resource and output format: 'viewport 3D ke PNG' (3D viewport to PNG). This clearly states what the tool does and distinguishes it from rendering tools like render_frame or render_viewport_to_path.

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 includes a prerequisite 'memerlukan UI Blender' (requires Blender UI), implying when not to use (e.g., headless mode), but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or provide exclusionary guidance. The usage context is implied, not clearly articulated.

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