get_screenshot_url

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: the tool returns a URL instead of binary image data, and explains why. This adds meaningful context. It does not cover error handling or authentication, but for a simple getter tool, the transparency is solid.

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, front-loaded with the purpose, and every sentence adds value. The second sentence justifies the return type without any fluff, achieving maximum conciseness.

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 simple one-parameter tool, the description adequately states the purpose and return behavior, and the presence of an output schema likely covers return structure. However, it lacks any parameter description and does not mention prerequisites, potential errors, or whether the URL is temporary, making it only minimally complete.

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 schema has only one parameter, 'uuid', with 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain what the uuid represents beyond the generic phrase 'for a scan'. It adds no details about format, required context, or how to obtain the uuid, leaving the agent to infer from the parameter name and tool name.

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 gets a screenshot URL for a scan, with the verb 'Get' and specific resource 'screenshot URL'. It further distinguishes itself by explaining it returns a link rather than image bytes, setting it apart from sibling tools like get_scan_result or get_page_dom.

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 usage context by stating that screenshots are large and 'meant for a human to open', implying this tool is appropriate when a human will view the image. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools or exclusion scenarios, so it falls short of a 5.

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