browser_screenshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden; it at least discloses that output is base64 or a file written to savePath, and that the image is PNG. It does not mention whether the tool scrolls, waits, or changes page state, nor explain the default capture region or full-page behavior.

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?

One short front-loaded sentence conveys the core action and output mode with no filler. It is concise, though the completeness trade-off is substantial.

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 tool with no output schema and bare string/boolean parameters, the description leaves key invocation details unexplained: element selector semantics, fullPage effect, default viewport behavior, and interaction consequences. It is adequate only as a minimal stub.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the bare schema. It only mentions savePath ('if savePath is set') and leaves element and fullPage completely undeclared, forcing the agent to guess their formats and behavior.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Capture a PNG screenshot', and reports the output format. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling browser_snapshot, whose name could imply a similar visual-capture role, so clarity is strong but not maximal.

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 only guidance is the conditional 'saves to disk if savePath is set', which is parameter behavior rather than a usage policy. There is no statement of when to choose this over browser_snapshot, browser_evaluate, or other siblings, and no exclusions.

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