Screenshot display slots

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

Annotations flag this as non-read-only and destructive, and the description justifies that by disclosing the file side effect: PNGs are written to the output folder in addition to being returned. It stops short of tying that to the 'overwrite' behavior (default false) or saying what existing files are replaced.

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?

Two tight sentences with the render/return behavior front-loaded and the two most surprising defaults (uncropped first person, gui square) immediately after. The parenthetical about the output folder 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 7-parameter, all-optional tool with no output schema, the description covers the return type (images) and file side effect, which is the minimum an agent needs. It leaves gaps on path-vs-slots interaction and overwrite semantics that the sparse schema descriptions do not fill.

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 71% and the undocumented 'crop' param is explained by 'First person is uncropped by default', which conveys the default cropping behavior. The slot enum's meaning is partly clarified ('gui is the inventory square'), though the relationship between 'path' and 'slots' stays implicit.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: renders display slots as the Blockbench display editor shows them and returns PNG images. It is distinguishable from the plain 'screenshot' sibling only by implication (the display-slot framing), not by an explicit contrast.

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?

Implies usage for inspecting item display slots and explains two defaults (first person uncropped, gui is the inventory square), but never says when to prefer this over 'screenshot', 'display_get', or 'export', and gives no prerequisites or exclusions.

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