Save Source Screenshot

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

Annotations indicate 'destructiveHint: true', which suggests this tool can modify state or create files, but the description only says 'saves' without clarifying side effects (e.g., overwriting existing files, required permissions, or impact on sources). The description does not add significant context beyond the annotations.

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, clear sentence that is front-loaded with the action. It is concise and efficient, though it misses additional context that could be useful.

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 has 8 parameters with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description is somewhat minimal. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details such as how the screenshot is saved, interactions with the filesystem, or performance considerations. However, for a straightforward save operation, it may be sufficient.

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 the description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. However, the description mentions 'screenshot of a source' which aligns with the parameters, but it doesn't explain parameter constraints like imageCompressionQuality semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 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 clearly states the action ('Saves a screenshot of a source') and the destination ('to the filesystem'), which is specific enough. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'obs-get-source-screenshot' by mentioning the saving aspect, though it could be more explicit about the difference.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to use 'obs-get-source-screenshot' instead. The description doesn't specify any prerequisites or context for using it.

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