snapshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It fails to indicate side effects, whether it modifies device state, requires an active session, or produces output. The single sentence offers no insight into the tool's behavior beyond the name.

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 extremely concise (one sentence, no fluff), but it lacks structural elements like usage context or parameter highlights. It is appropriately short but sacrifices informativeness for brevity.

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 27 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is woefully incomplete. It does not explain the snapshot's purpose, return format, or how to interpret results. The description fails to provide a complete picture for agent decision-making.

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 81%, so the parameters are largely self-documenting with their own descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning to the parameters, but does not need to given the high coverage. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('capture') and resource ('accessibility snapshot'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like 'screenshot' and other interaction tools. However, it doesn't explain what an accessibility snapshot is, which could lead to ambiguity about its output.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'screenshot' or other inspection tools. No prerequisites or context of use are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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