capture_screenshot

Does 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. The one-line description does not reveal whether the screenshot is returned as a file, base64, or path, nor does it mention side effects or the difference between capture methods. The only behavioral hint resides in the wait_for_render parameter description, not in the tool description itself.

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 zero waste. It communicates the essential action clearly and does not repeat information already present in the schema.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, yet the description does not explain what the tool returns, where the screenshot is saved, or how the cdp and api methods differ in practice. The schema describes inputs well, but the missing output contract and lack of preconditions leave an agent uncertain about how to consume the result.

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%, with all four parameters already explained in the input schema. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning, which matches the baseline expectation: because the schema does the heavy lifting, no additional parameter explanation is required.

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: 'Take a screenshot of the TradingView chart'. This clearly distinguishes the tool from the large sibling list, which contains no other screenshot operation. Even with no title, the function is unambiguous.

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 intended use is implied by the verb, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or whether certain preconditions must hold. The wait_for_render parameter hints at a timing concern, but the top-level description does not state prerequisites or exclusions.

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