wavexis_screenshot

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

Description discloses side effects (launches browser, navigates, evaluates JS, writes to disk) beyond annotations. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and description adds specifics. Return format is also described. No contradiction.

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?

Description is extremely concise—three short paragraphs covering purpose, alternatives, side effects, and return format. No wasted words, front-loaded with core purpose.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (many parameters, many sibling tools), the description provides complete context: purpose, usage guidelines, side effects, return structure. Output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed further.

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 input schema has comprehensive descriptions for all properties, so the description does not add additional meaning. Schema coverage is 0% per context, but the actual schema includes parameter descriptions. Leading to baseline 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?

Description clearly states the tool captures a screenshot of a web page or matched element. It distinguishes from sibling tools wavexis_pdf (print-ready document) and wavexis_annotated_screenshot (labelled element markers). Verb and resource are specific.

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?

Explicitly provides when to use alternatives: 'Use wavexis_pdf when a print-ready document is needed, or wavexis_annotated_screenshot when labelled element markers are required.' Also lists side effects, which helps the agent decide context.

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