get_viewport_screenshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool captures a screenshot and returns it as an Image, which is helpful, but lacks crucial behavioral details: whether this requires specific Blender state/context, if it's read-only or modifies state, performance characteristics, or error conditions. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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 perfectly structured: a clear purpose statement followed by parameter and return value explanations in separate lines. Every sentence earns its place with zero waste, and information is front-loaded appropriately.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (capturing a screenshot with one parameter) and no annotations or output schema, the description is partially complete. It covers the purpose, parameter meaning, and return type, but lacks behavioral context and detailed output format. For a tool with no structured safety or output information, this leaves room for improvement.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage (the schema only provides type, title, and default), the description fully compensates by explaining the parameter's purpose: 'Maximum size in pixels for the largest dimension' with the default value. This adds essential meaning beyond the bare schema, though it doesn't specify constraints like minimum/maximum values.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Capture a screenshot') and target resource ('current Blender 3D viewport'), distinguishing it from all sibling tools which involve downloading assets, generating models, getting statuses, or importing assets. The verb+resource combination is precise and unambiguous.

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 implies usage context (when working with Blender 3D viewport) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no sibling tools that perform similar screenshot functions, so no differentiation is needed, but it doesn't mention prerequisites or constraints beyond the parameter.

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