charlotte_screenshot_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Retrieve' clearly implies a non-destructive read-only operation, and 'Returns the image data and metadata' sets expectations for the output. No side effects or special requirements are mentioned, but for a simple retrieval tool this is sufficient.

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, concise sentence that states the action, the target resource, and the return value without any redundant wording or 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?

The tool has only one parameter and no output schema, so the description needs to explain the outcome, which it does ('Returns the image data and metadata'). For a simple getter, this is fully complete and requires no additional context.

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 input schema covers the only parameter 'id' with a clear description and format example. The tool description adds only 'by its ID', which reinforces the schema without adding new semantic meaning. Given 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is 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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('saved screenshot artifact by its ID'), making the operation clear. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like charlotte_screenshot (which likely captures a new screenshot) and charlotte_screenshot_delete (which deletes) by focusing on retrieval.

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 clear context that this tool is for previously saved screenshots, implying it should be used when an artifact ID is already available. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling tool names and the phrase 'previously saved' give practical usage context.

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