blender_snapshot_viewport

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

The description aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint) and adds value by specifying that the tool returns a file path for multimodal analysis. No contradictions. Slight bonus for the example illustrating expected behavior.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus an example. It front-loads the core purpose and avoids extraneous details. 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?

For a simple snapshot tool, the description covers the return value (file path) and provides a usage example. It does not explain file naming conventions or differentiate from similar tools, but given the low complexity and rich annotations, it is nearly 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?

The input schema already provides clear descriptions for all parameters. The tool description does not add new parameter information beyond the example, which uses default dimensions. Schema coverage is high, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 captures the 3D viewport as a PNG image and returns the file path. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'blender_get_viewport_screenshot', which likely serves a similar purpose.

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 gives an example use case (capturing a scene layout) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance. The context is implied but not comprehensive.

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