Records screen observations with normalized anchors and returns grid data so agents can map verified UI transitions and replay learned routes.
Record a screen observation with normalized anchors and return its grid.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | ||
| rows | No | ||
| title | Yes | ||
| app_id | Yes | ||
| anchors | Yes | ||
| columns | No | ||
| viewport | Yes | ||
| screenshot_sha256 | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does 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 implies a write operation and mentions returning a grid, but it does not disclose persistence, permissions, idempotency, side effects, or what 'grid' contains.
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 single sentence is front-loaded and free of filler, stating the core action and return value. It is concise, though extremely terse relative to the tool's complexity.
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?
This is a complex mutation tool with 8 parameters, nested objects, no annotations, no output schema, and no schema descriptions. The description provides only the broad purpose and a vague return reference, leaving key invocation details unspecified.
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?
Schema description coverage is 0% across 8 parameters, including nested viewport and anchors objects. The description only mentions normalized anchors and does not explain app_id, url, title, viewport dimensions, rows, columns, or screenshot_sha256.
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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Record a screen observation' and adds that it returns a grid. It is clearer than a tautology, but it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools such as pulse_map_record_transition.
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 gives no conditions for when to use this tool versus alternatives like pulse_map_get or pulse_map_record_transition. It implies recording a screen observation but provides no exclusions, prerequisites, or comparison guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.