get_screenshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the return format ('base64 PNG image') and implies the game must be running, but says nothing about permissions, potential side effects, performance cost, or whether the capture disrupts gameplay. These gaps are notable for a zero-annotation tool.

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 with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the action, target, and output format.

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 zero-parameter, read-only-style tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential facts: what is captured, the target window, and the return encoding. It lacks only minor context such as whether the game must be running or if the capture is async, but is largely sufficient for correct 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description adds no parameter information, which is appropriate since none exist.

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 a specific verb 'Capture' and resource 'screenshot of the currently running game window', clearly indicating what the tool does. It does not explicitly differentiate from any sibling tool, though the purpose is distinct enough that an agent would not confuse it with send_input, run_lua, or get_objects.

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 provides no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., game must be running), and no alternatives. It merely states the action without indicating the context in which an agent should select this tool.

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