record

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the fixed-duration behavior, the contact-sheet output format, and the side effect that raw frames are written to disk. It omits any mention of screen-recording permissions or cleanup of saved frames.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and output, followed by the discriminating use case and a side-effect note. No filler or redundancy.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description does the heavy lifting by describing the returned image and the on-disk frames, and the schema fully covers the 7 parameters. Remaining gaps (permissions, frame retention) are minor for a read-only capture helper.

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 coverage is 100% with all 7 parameters documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description only loosely echoes duration and the grid layout (cols) and adds no syntax or constraint detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

States a specific verb (record) and resource (the screen) plus the exact deliverable: a numbered, timestamped contact sheet image. It also implicitly separates this from the sibling 'capture' by framing it around 'anything that cannot be understood from a single screenshot.'

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?

Explicitly gives the usage condition — inspect motion such as dragging, animations, flashes, reordering — which is clear context for choosing this over a static screenshot. It does not name the alternative tool (capture) directly, so routing relies on inference.

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