charlotte_screenshot_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It correctly conveys a read-only retrieval operation with no side effects. While it doesn't add extensive behavioral details, the nature of the tool is straightforward and the description is accurate.

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, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the verb and object. It contains no fluff and is appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must explain return values. It states 'image data and metadata' but lacks specifics (e.g., format, structure). For a simple tool, this is adequate but minimally complete.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no new parameter information beyond what the schema already provides (ID and example). The tool-level context 'previously saved' is useful but not parameter-specific.

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 verb 'retrieve' and the resource 'screenshot artifact', and specifies what it returns ('image data and metadata'). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like charlotte_screenshot (capture new) and charlotte_screenshot_delete (delete).

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 when an ID is available ('by its ID'), providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools, missing the highest tier of guidance.

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