Google Sites MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Screenshot

gsites_screenshot

Read-onlyIdempotent

Capture a PNG screenshot of the current browser page to inspect the Google Sites editor layout, locate drop zones, or verify visual results when a snapshot is insufficient.

Instructions

Take a PNG screenshot of the current browser page so you can see the editor layout. Use when gsites_snapshot is not enough (e.g. to locate drop zones or verify visual results).

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": "gsites_screenshot"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.0Nov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds that the output is a PNG of the current browser page and that it reflects the live editor state. It does not say whether the capture is viewport-only or full-page, nor how the image bytes are returned, which keeps it below 5.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and output format, followed by the when-to-use rule. No filler and nothing that restates the tool name alone.

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 zero-parameter, annotation-rich tool with no output schema, the description covers action, output type, and selection criteria. The only gap is capture scope (viewport vs full page), which matters when deciding between this and gsites_snapshot.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description correctly implies the scope is fixed to the current page rather than something configurable.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Take a PNG screenshot of the current browser page') and explains the intent ('so you can see the editor layout'), which makes it immediately distinguishable from sibling gsites_snapshot.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly routes the agent: use this when gsites_snapshot is not enough, with two concrete motivating cases (locating drop zones, verifying visual results). The alternative and the condition that selects it are both named.

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