capture_live_site

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the Playwright dependency and that the capture is live and fresh, but it does not state whether the operation is read-only, how failures surface, or what the tool returns.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence states the action, target, and mechanism, plus the necessary dependency warning. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 two-parameter screenshot tool, the description covers the action, prerequisite, and target adequately. The main missing detail is the return format, but given the low complexity and no output schema, this is a minor gap.

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?

Both parameters have full schema descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'full-page screenshot' aligns with the url parameter but adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, and waitStrategy is not discussed in the description.

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?

States a specific verb ('Take') and resource ('fresh full-page screenshot of a live website URL') and names the mechanism (headless browser). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that retrieve metadata, analyze structure, or record motion.

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 use when an up-to-date visual capture is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No comparison is made to sibling tools such as analyze_page_structure or record_site_motion.

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