td_viewport

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the tool is safe. The description adds value by explaining that small captures are returned as viewable images while large captures (or return_as='path') return a temp-file path. No contradictions.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage guidance, then parameter details. Every sentence adds value, no filler.

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 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers output behavior (inline vs file path) and key parameter constraints. It could mention fallback defaults for width/height, but overall it is complete enough for an agent 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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the target parameter as 'TOP/COMP path, or the literal ''pane''' and that JPG quality is ignored for PNG. This helps the agent understand parameter behavior.

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 tool captures a TOP/COMP viewer or network editor pane as an image. This is a specific verb+resource pair, and the sibling tools (node creation, deletion, parameter updates) are all distinct, so the tool is well-differentiated.

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 clear usage context: 'Use this to actually see the result of edits instead of guessing.' It explains the target parameter and return options. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives.

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