Capture an image of the current browser page to visually verify or archive web content. Optionally capture the full page when needed.
Take a screenshot of the current page
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| full_page | No | Whether to screenshot the full page (default: false) You should avoid fullscreen if it's not important, since the images can be quite large |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and the title, so the safety profile is covered. Beyond that, the description adds nothing: it does not say what the tool returns (image bytes, URL, base64), how the current page is determined, or whether prior navigation is required. For a capture tool with no output schema, that is a real gap.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though its brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined concision.
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 and minimal annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining what a screenshot returns and any constraints, and it does neither. An agent knows the intent but not the result shape or preconditions.
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 description coverage is 100% and the single full_page parameter is documented in the schema, including the caution about large images. The description adds no parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb+resource ('take a screenshot of the current page') that an agent can distinguish from text-oriented siblings like scraping_browser_get_text or get_html. It does not, however, differentiate itself from the related scraping_browser_snapshot tool, leaving the agent to infer the distinction.
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 no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., a page must be navigated to first), and no mention of the alternative scraping_browser_snapshot or get_html siblings. Usage is only implied by the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.