Capture a PNG screenshot from an Android device and save it as an artifact for visual verification and debugging.
Capture a PNG screenshot from an Android device into artifacts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| prefix | No | ||
| serial | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0-alpha.14Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the outcome (a PNG artifact) but does not explain device selection behavior, behavior with multiple connected devices, error conditions, whether it requires an Appium session, or how artifact naming works.
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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately brief for a straightforward capture tool, though it sacrifices explanatory detail that other dimensions needed.
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 annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter description coverage, the tool leaves important context unstated: optional parameters, device selection defaults, and operational requirements. It is callable with zero arguments, but an agent choosing between Android and iOS capture tools gets no explicit routing or follow-up 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 0%, and the description does not explain the meaning of the optional 'prefix' or 'serial' parameters. An agent is left to guess what 'prefix' affects and how 'serial' selects a device, so the description adds no semantic value beyond the raw schema.
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 verb and resource: it captures a PNG screenshot from an Android device into artifacts. It clearly distinguishes itself from ios.capture_screenshot and other device/appium tools by naming the Android platform and the output destination.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus ios.capture_screenshot or other screenshot-related tools, nor any mention of prerequisites like an active ADB connection or booted emulator. The platform mention implies Android-only usage, but no alternatives or exclusion conditions are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.