save_screenshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions saving to disk and the default directory, but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., overwriting behavior), required permissions, or return value. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 consists of two concise sentences with no superfluous words. The primary action ('Save') is front-loaded, and the alternative guidance is efficiently integrated.

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?

The tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description does not mention the return value (e.g., file path or success status) or handle error cases. While adequate for a simple save operation, some contextual details are missing.

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%, so the schema already documents all 3 parameters clearly. The description does not add any extra parameter-level details beyond what the schema provides, earning the baseline score 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 explicitly states 'Save a full-quality PNG screenshot to disk.' It identifies the verb (save), resource (screenshot), format (PNG), and quality (full-quality), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling tool get_screenshot.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('when you need a high-quality image for reporting, debugging, or sharing') and when not to use it ('not for LLM processing'), directly naming the alternative tool get_screenshot.

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