capture_display

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

The description discloses the primary behavior: capturing a screenshot, saving it to a PNG, and returning the path. However, with no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does not mention potential side effects like file location, overwrite behavior, or how the useVic parameter affects capture 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 a single concise sentence that clearly states the action, target, output format, and return value. There is no filler, redundancy, or irrelevant detail.

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?

This is a simple tool with one optional boolean parameter, a complete schema, and an output schema. The description covers the essential behavior. It is slightly incomplete due to missing usage guidance and side-effect details, but it remains adequate for a tool of this 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?

The single parameter useVic is fully described in the input schema with default e true and an explanation of its meaning. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 states a clear verb and resource: it captures the current screen, saves it as a PNG, and returns the path. This is distinct from sibling tools like get_display_state and get_display_text, which inspect state rather than produce an image file.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use capture_display versus sibling tools such as get_display_state or get_display_text. The description gives no conditions, exclusions, or alternatives, so the agent is left to infer the appropriate context.

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