banner_get_screenshots

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It reveals the key side effect: 'Clears the queue after returning,' which is critical for an agent to know. It does not mention behavior for an empty queue or whether clearing is scoped to targetId, but the main behavioral risk is disclosed.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The main action is front-loaded, and the important side-effect warning is placed in a short second sentence. 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?

For a single-parameter tool this is close to complete, but there is no output schema and the description does not state what the return value looks like or clarify whether the cleared queue is per-target or global. The targetId parameter's role in retrieval is left to inference.

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 description coverage is 100% because targetId is documented as 'Target ID of the tab.' The tool description adds no extra meaning about how targetId interacts with the screenshot queue, so it stays at the baseline of 3.

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 ('Retrieve') and a specific resource ('screenshots captured via the Argus banner Screenshot button'). This distinguishes it from sibling tab_screenshot, which is about capturing screenshots, not retrieving queued ones.

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 source ('captured via the Argus banner Screenshot button') implies when to use this tool, but it never explicitly states when not to use it or names an alternative like tab_screenshot. The guidance is present only by implication.

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