screenshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses automatic resizing/compression for LLM limits, and capture of console errors/warnings. While it doesn't mention rate limits or auth, the behavioral traits are well-covered for a read-only capture tool.

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 three sentences with no repetition or fluff. Information is front-loaded: the first sentence states the main action, followed by optimization and error capture. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Considering 6 parameters (all documented in schema) and no output schema, the description adds useful context on optimization and error output. It does not specify return format, but for a screenshot tool that is often implicit. Overall sufficient for the complexity.

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% with descriptions for all 6 parameters. The description adds only general context (optimization) beyond schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate. No significant additional semantics are introduced.

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's purpose: 'Capture a screenshot from any URL' with specification of typical use on localhost and automatic optimization for LLM consumption. It effectively distinguishes the action and resource.

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 implies usage when an LLM-optimized screenshot is needed but lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives. No sibling tools exist, but context of when to avoid (e.g., if raw image needed) is missing.

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