take_screenshot

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds context about the standalone nature and lack of Page Map dependency, which is not in annotations. It also clarifies full_page behavior (captures scrollable page vs viewport), providing useful behavioral detail. No contradiction.

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 exceptionally concise, with only three lines. It front-loads the primary purpose, then adds necessary parameter clarification. Every sentence serves a distinct function with no redundancy.

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?

The tool has a simple signature (one optional boolean), and the description covers the core functionality, parameter behavior, and operational prerequisite (standalone, no Page Map). With an output schema present, the lack of return-value details is acceptable. Overall, it's a complete and self-contained description.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains the full_page parameter, meaning 'capture the full scrollable page' vs. default viewport only. This adds context beyond the schema's default false, making the boolean parameter's impact clear.

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?

Description clearly states the tool's function: taking a screenshot of the current page, which is distinct from sibling tools like get_page_state or navigate_back. The verb 'take' and resource 'screenshot' are specific, and the additional note about being a standalone diagnostic tool clarifies its role.

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 context that this tool is standalone and does not require an active Page Map, which helps the agent decide when to use it independently. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the standalone note implies it can be used without prerequisites, giving sufficient guidance.

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