capture

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It does usefully disclose that screenshots are saved to runtime/captures/<name>.png and that clip_selector captures a single element, but it does not mention overwrite behavior, authentication requirements beyond 'optionally logged in via profile', or what return_image controls.

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 two sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the key scoping details (viewport, profile, element clipping, output path) are compactly included. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves gaps. It gives enough to make a basic capture call and understand the save location, but an agent would not know the behavioral implications of return_image, wait_for_selector, or full_page without inspecting their titles.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for 8 parameters. It adds meaning for viewport ('desktop or mobile'), profile ('optionally logged in'), clip_selector ('captures a single element'), and name (via the save path), but leaves full_page, return_image, and wait_for_selector semantically unexplained.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Screenshot any URL'. This clearly identifies the tool's core function and distinguishes it from sibling tools like capture_set or compare_images, which operate on sets or comparisons rather than a single URL 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?

The description gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as capture_set, qa_page, or compare_images. It mentions optional login and element clipping but does not state the conditions that would make this tool preferable over a sibling.

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