capture_screenshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so well. It discloses the external side effect of writing a PNG file to disk, the limitation that the TradingView window must be rendered on screen, and the rationale for returning a filesystem path instead of base64. This gives an agent the safety and operational context it needs.

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 definition is front-loaded with the core action and then uses clear labeled sections for WHEN TO USE, SIDE EFFECTS, and LIMITATIONS. Every sentence contributes useful information without padding.

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 three-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage context, side effects, limitations, and the return value sufficiently. An agent has enough information to call it correctly and understand the main operational risks.

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 region, method, and filename. The description repeats the region enum values and otherwise adds no syntax, format, or default information beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb and resource: capture a lossless PNG screenshot of the TradingView window and save it locally. It also lists valid regions and the return type. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling chart_get_snapshot, which may also produce chart imagery, so sibling differentiation is missing.

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 WHEN TO USE section gives clear context: call when the user requests visual verification of chart patterns, drawings, or UI layout. There is no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or named alternative such as chart_get_snapshot, so it falls just short of the top score.

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