get_screenshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, what it returns, error behavior, or any side effects; it only gives a brief contextual note about the screenshot's source.

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 short sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the resource identity and follows with the source context, though the parenthetical placement is slightly awkward.

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 one-parameter getter with no output schema, the description gives basic context but leaves gaps around return format and exact behavior. It is minimally adequate but not complete enough to fully guide invocation without 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 0% for the single `file` parameter, so the description must compensate. It does so by explaining that the path comes from a 'shot' line in recent_activity, adding substantial meaning beyond the bare string schema.

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 identifies the resource as a screenshot taken by dashhound and connects it to recent_activity, but it does not explicitly state the action (retrieve/fetch) or distinguish the tool's purpose from its sibling beyond the path source. The tool name supplies the verb, so the purpose is inferable but not fully articulated.

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?

It implies that the `file` argument should come from a 'shot' line in recent_activity, which is useful workflow context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or what conditions make it the right choice.

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