get_view

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It only states 'Get a screenshot' but does not explain how the screenshot is returned (image data, file path, base64), whether the view can be changed, or if the operation is idempotent. The return value is vague.

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 short and front-loaded with the purpose. The args and returns sections are structured. However, listing all enum values is somewhat redundant with the schema, but not excessive.

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?

The tool has a simple parameter and an output schema (likely defining the screenshot format), but the description omits details about the output format and any prerequisites. It is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's usage without additional 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?

The description repeats the enum list from the schema without adding meaning (e.g., explaining what each view orientation is, like 'Isometric' vs 'Front'). Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description could have compensated by describing the views, but it did not.

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 gets a screenshot of the active view and lists the available views. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_object or get_objects by specifying it captures a visual screenshot rather than data objects.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when a screenshot is needed vs. getting object data). It does not mention prerequisites like whether a view must be active or what constitutes the 'active view.'

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