stagehand_screenshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states that the screenshot is returned and saved as a resource, adding useful side-effect information. However, it lacks details on output format, resource naming, or whether an active page is required, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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 a single concise sentence of 12 words, immediately conveying the core function and side effect. Every word contributes value, with no redundant or vague filler.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential action and the resource-saving behavior. It is complete enough for a basic screenshot tool, though it could clarify what 'return it' means (e.g., base64, URL) or that an active page context is required.

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?

The input schema has a single parameter 'name' with full description, achieving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description does not add additional meaning to the parameter beyond what the schema already provides, aligning with the baseline 3 for high schema coverage.

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 'Capture a full-page screenshot and return it (and save as a resource)' clearly states the action (capture) and the resource (screenshot), while specifying 'full-page' to differentiate it from partial screenshots. It is distinct from sibling tools like stagehand_navigate or stagehand_extract, which serve different purposes.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as stagehand_observe or stagehand_demo_video. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., an active session or page) or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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