Screenshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses only that hide_overlay hides the Portal's overlay first; it does not state permissions, return format, side effects, or whether the call is safe/read-only.

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 very short and front-loaded, which is appropriate, but the first sentence is largely tautological and does not earn its place. The second sentence is useful but the whole remains under-specified for a two-parameter tool.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter description coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value, distinguish from screenshot siblings, or document the device parameter, all of which an agent needs to invoke the tool correctly.

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 explain the parameters. It partially clarifies hide_overlay but says nothing about the device parameter, leaving half the inputs undocumented in both schema and description.

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?

"Plain screenshot" essentially restates the tool name and title without a distinct verb or resource scope. It does not differentiate this tool from close siblings such as get_screenshot, screenshot_path, read_screen, or perceive_screen, so an agent cannot tell when this one is the right choice.

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 no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no named alternatives. It mentions hide_overlay but does not explain when to set it versus using another screenshot-related sibling.

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