gmod_screenshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and mostly succeeds: it discloses the return type (PNG image), two side effects on system state (the target window is maximized and brought to the foreground), and a runtime prerequisite (game must be running). It stops short of saying what happens on failure or how the resulting image is delivered.

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?

Four short sentences, each earning its place: platform gate, action, return value, side effect, and prerequisite. Front-loaded with the platform restriction and with 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?

For a parameterless tool with no output schema, the description supplies everything needed to invoke it correctly: platform, required game state, side effects, and return format. The main gap is the absence of any failure-mode or ordering guidance relative to the other gmod_* tools.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies; there is no parameter surface for the description to explain. The description correctly implies the capture target is implicit (the GMod window) rather than configurable.

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 states a specific verb and resource — take a screenshot of the Garry's Mod window — and adds distinguishing constraints (Windows only, game must be running). It does not name any sibling explicitly, but 'screenshot of the GMod window' is unmistakably distinct from gmod_focus_window, gmod_zoom, or gmod_execute_lua.

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?

It gives real preconditions — Windows-only platform and a running game instance — which tells the agent when the call is valid. However, it never routes the agent between alternatives (e.g. gmod_focus_window for bringing the window forward without capturing, or gmod_zoom for a scaled view), so selection guidance is only implied.

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