Capture Screenshot

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

With no annotations, the description effectively discloses behavior: step auto-ordering, auto-addition of screenshot step, error types (ELEMENT_NOT_FOUND, etc.), and HTTP auth usage. It does not cover rate limits or permissions, but the core behaviors are well-explained.

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 relatively long but well-organized with headings (PARAMS, 6 STEPS, COMMON ERRORS, EXAMPLE). It front-loads the purpose and uses bullet points. Some redundancy exists (e.g., repeating step definitions already in schema), but overall it is efficient for the tool's complexity.

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 complex tool with 6 step types, nested objects, and no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: parameter descriptions, step details, error handling, ordering, and an example. It is complete enough for an AI agent to correctly select and invoke the tool.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds significant value beyond schema: details on step interactions, auto-ordering, common errors, and an example. This includes error handling tips that are not in 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's purpose: 'Capture webpage screenshot with optional pre-capture interactions.' It uses a specific verb ('Capture') and resource ('webpage screenshot'), and is distinct from the sibling tool 'extractDom', which is for DOM extraction.

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 explicit guidelines for using steps, including ordering, error handling (with specific COMMON ERRORS & FIXES), and an example. It explains when to add certain steps (e.g., wait before failing step). However, it does not explicitly compare to the sibling tool 'extractDom' or state when not to use this tool.

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