Watch my latest screen recording

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

Annotations already cover the read-only, closed-world safety profile, and the description adds real context on top: the data's provenance (WatchRecorder menu-bar app, macOS companion of watch-mcp) and the semantic content of the result (what the user showed and what they said aloud). It stops short of disclosing behavior when no recording exists or how the default budget is chosen.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the identity of the resource, followed by what it returns and when to call it. No repetition of the name/title and no filler.

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?

For a zero-required-parameter read tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers identity, return content, and invocation triggers. The only omission is edge-case behavior — what happens when there is no recent recording.

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?

There is one optional parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already explains 'budget' as a keyframe cap bounded 4–128. The description says nothing about budget and adds no semantics beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 names a specific resource (the most recent screen + voice recording from the WatchRecorder macOS app) and states what it returns (storyboards and timeline, same as watch_video). It is trivially distinguishable from siblings because it takes no target argument and always refers to the newest capture.

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?

It gives concrete triggers: the user says they just recorded something, or pastes a WatchRecorder prompt. That is a clear usage context, though it never states the inverse case — e.g. that you should use watch_video instead when the user supplies an explicit file or URL.

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