record_videoStart a screen recording to capture React Native app interaction flows for review or debugging; stop it with stop_recording. Android clips are capped at 3 minutes.
Start a screen recording (one at a time). Stop with stop_recording. Android uses screenrecord, which caps a clip at 3 minutes. codec applies to iOS only.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| codec | No | ||
| device | No | ||
| output_path | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses real traits (single concurrent recording, Android's 3-minute cap, codec being iOS-only) but leaves out permissions, where the file lands / how to retrieve it, and what output_path means.
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?
Four terse sentences, front-loaded with the core action and constraint; each clause (stop tool, duration cap, codec platform note) carries information the agent needs.
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?
Covers concurrency, platform limits, and how to stop, but with 3 undocumented params, no output schema, and no annotations, it should also explain output_path and device to be truly complete.
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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, yet it only clarifies codec ('applies to iOS only'). device and output_path get no explanation of format, defaults, or effect, and codec's enum values already live in the 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?
Specific verb+resource ('Start a screen recording') with scope ('one at a time'), and it explicitly names the sibling used to stop it. An agent can distinguish this from other capture tools without opening the schema.
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?
Gives the operating constraint (one at a time) and routes the agent to stop_recording to end it, plus platform-specific constraints. It does not discuss when to prefer this over screenshot, keeping it just short of explicit alternatives reasoning.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.