capture_network_editor

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

With no annotations, the description carries full disclosure burden. It transparently states the side effect: 'The image is written to disk only; open output_path with your file reader to look at it,' clarifying the output is not returned but persisted. It does not mention failure conditions or file format, hence the slight deduction.

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 compact and front-loaded. The purpose is stated first, followed by behavior, usage guidance, and parameter details. Every sentence adds information without redundancy. The structure is ideal for quick scanning by an agent.

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 is simple (two params, no output schema, no annotations), and the description covers all essential dimensions: purpose, side effects, file usage, alternatives, and parameter meaning. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the parameters. It provides concise but meaningful semantics for both: 'output_path: Image file path' and 'node_path: Node path to navigate to before capture.' These go well beyond the schema's bare titles, making invocation unambiguous.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Capture a screenshot of the network editor.' It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly steering away from get_node_info/list_children for inspection, making its unique purpose (visual wiring confirmation) clear.

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 explicit guidance: 'Prefer get_node_info or list_children for inspecting node connections unless visual confirmation of wiring is genuinely needed.' This tells the agent exactly when this tool is the right choice and names the preferred alternatives.

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