browser_screenshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that returns a compressed JPEG by default and explains options like fullPage and highlightNodeIds. However, it lacks details on blocking behavior, side effects (e.g., scrolling), or permissions, leaving some behavioral traits unspecified.

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 concise with a clear structure: a summary sentence followed by a bullet list of options. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 description explains the core functionality and options but omits details about the return format (e.g., base64 vs. file) and blocking nature. Given no output schema, the return value description is incomplete, and the level of detail is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds some context for options like fullPage and highlightNodeIds beyond the schema, but the gains are marginal. The default format and quality are noted but not deeply elaborated.

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 'Capture a screenshot of the current page' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from stream_screencast for non-blocking capture, making the purpose distinct from siblings.

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 explicitly recommends stream_screencast for non-blocking visual capture, providing a clear alternative. However, it does not cover all siblings or provide comprehensive when-to-use guidance beyond that one distinction.

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