flow_screenshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the screenshot is of the 'active' workspace and that the browser is a 'local background browser,' which implies no need for a visible browser window. However, it does not state whether the screenshot is saved to disk, returned as data, or how errors (e.g., no active workspace) are handled.

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, well-formed sentence that front-loads the action and resource. No wasted words.

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 one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It omits where the screenshot goes (file path, return value) and what happens if no active workspace exists, which are important for correct invocation in a browser automation context.

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% (the single 'filename' parameter has a description), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 (Captures) and resource (screenshot of the active Google Flow workspace) with clear scope. The phrase 'in your local background browser' distinguishes it from a hypothetical cloud or remote screenshot tool and aligns with siblings like flow_launch_browser and flow_status.

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 implies usage (capturing a screenshot of the active workspace) but gives no explicit when/when-not guidance or alternative tools. A user must infer that this is for visual inspection, perhaps instead of flow_inspect_canvas.

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