screenshot

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

Annotations indicate read-only safety, and the description adds behavioral details: inline PNG format, runtime vs editor channel, region cropping with clamping, and token-saving advice. 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with core purpose, then parameter details. Every word earns its place with no 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?

For a two-parameter tool with no output schema needed (inline image), the description fully covers behavior, usage, and a best practice tip. No gaps.

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%, but the description adds significant meaning: target default, region 'clamped', and a practical workflow tip. This goes beyond schema 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 clearly states the tool captures an inline PNG image, specifies two targets (game/editor) with distinct behaviors, and explains the region parameter. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like read_file or get_remote_tree.

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 explains when to use each target and provides a workflow hint (screenshot full then crop). It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance, but the sibling list implies niche usage.

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