tor_screenshot

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that it returns native MCP image content, which is useful. However, it does not mention any behavioral aspects like requiring an active page or potential side effects of capturing the screenshot. It adds minimal context beyond annotations.

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 concise sentence of 10 words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without any redundant information. 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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally viable. However, it lacks usage guidance (e.g., distinguishing from tor_screenshot_element) and parameter semantics, making it incomplete for a new agent to know exactly when and how to invoke it. Annotations cover safety, but the description leaves gaps.

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 one parameter, full_page, with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not explain this parameter at all. The parameter name 'full_page' is somewhat self-explanatory, but the description fails to clarify when to set it true (full page) versus false (viewport). The description provides no added semantics for the parameter.

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 clearly states 'Take a screenshot' with a specific verb and resource, and adds the return type 'native MCP image content.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like tor_screenshot_element (which captures a specific element) and tor_read_page (which reads page content). This is a clear and specific purpose.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of using it for a full-page capture versus tor_screenshot_element for element captures, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The description only states what it does, not when to choose it.

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