desktop_screenshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the target ('foreground OrcaSlicer') and optional local desktop environment, but does not say that it returns an image/capture, whether it may capture sensitive screen content, or what happens when no local desktop is available.

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 sentence with no filler and front-loads the target and environment. Its brevity is efficient, though the vague verb 'inspect' weakens usefulness rather than length.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain the return behavior. It omits what the screenshot returns and how an agent should interpret the result, which is a material gap for an image-producing tool.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds nothing parameter-related, but there is nothing to document.

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 verb 'inspect' is vague and never states that the tool captures a screenshot; only the tool name supplies that meaning. It does specify the target ('foreground OrcaSlicer') and environment ('optional local desktop'), but does not differentiate it from siblings like desktop_focus or desktop_action.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus desktop_focus, desktop_action, or desktop_launch. The phrase 'optional local desktop' hints at a precondition but does not tell the agent when this tool is appropriate or when another desktop tool should be chosen.

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