infomaniak_nodejs_app_thumbnail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc. The description adds value by noting 'Manager-private' and explaining caching behavior (default cached, refresh forces fresh screenshot). No contradictions with 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 concise with four short sentences. It front-loads the primary purpose. Could be slightly more structured, but it efficiently conveys key points.

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 output schema exists and annotations are rich, the description covers purpose, behavioral nuance (cached/fresh), and use case. It does not explain prerequisites or error states, but overall it is complete enough for a read-only, low-risk tool.

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 coverage is low (33%): only 'refresh' has a description. The tool description only repeats the refresh behavior without explaining the two required parameters (hosting_id, vhost_route_id). This leaves their meaning and source unclear.

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 the tool retrieves a screenshot of a running Node.js app as a base64 JPEG data URL. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('screenshot'), and this functionality is distinct from sibling tools like status, logs, or actions.

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 provides a clear use case: 'visually confirm the app is alive without HTTP-probing.' It also mentions the refresh parameter's behavior. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it to alternatives like infomaniak_nodejs_app_status.

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