save_screenshots

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

The description discloses edge cases beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: clipped nodes are auto-recovered and flagged, empty nodes render blank, missing nodes produce null paths, and file names are sanitized. It also explains format and scale behavior, giving the agent a strong mental model of what happens.

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 dense but every sentence earns its place: it covers the operation, output shape, defaults, edge cases, and file naming without filler. The structure moves from general behavior to specific flags, making it easy to scan.

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, the description carries the full burden of explaining return values and does so precisely with the saved array, path nullability, recovered/empty flags, and naming convention. For a 4-parameter tool, this is complete enough to invoke correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that scale only applies to raster formats, path is null for missing nodes, and outDir is created if missing—details beyond the raw schema field descriptions.

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 ('Export nodes') and clearly identifies the resource (nodes) and destination (disk under outDir). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying per-node export with a saved-array output, and the detailed format list reinforces the purpose.

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 for when to use the tool: when you need to export specific nodes to a directory on disk. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the behavior and output are fully specified, making the use case evident.

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