wardogs-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

browser_screenshot

Save a timestamped PNG screenshot of the base builder window, selecting camera preset 1–4 or pressing 'f' to frame the base.

Instructions

Screenshot the builder window to plans/-.png. camera: 1..4 selects the builder's camera presets, 'f' frames the base.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "browser_screenshot"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No
`camera`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.3Sep 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the file output path and camera preset behavior, which is helpful. However, it does not explain whether the screenshot is saved automatically, whether the file is overwritten, or what happens if no name/camera is provided.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two short sentences with no filler. The primary action and output location are front-loaded, and the camera parameter behavior is explained efficiently.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a relatively simple tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core action, output location, and parameter meanings. Minor gaps remain around preconditions and default camera behavior, but the tool is sufficiently described for an agent to invoke it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the parameters. It does explain 'camera' as 1..4 presets or 'f' to frame the base, and it shows that 'name' is used in the output filename. This adds meaningful semantic context beyond the bare schema definitions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Screenshot the builder window', plus an exact output destination ('plans/<name>-<time>.png'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling browser tools such as browser_open, browser_close, and browser_readback.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any preconditions (e.g., browser open or builder loaded). The behavior is implied by the name, but there is no guidance about when a screenshot is appropriate or when another browser tool should be used.

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