screenshot

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the output is a base64 PNG, but does not mention whether the tool is read-only or destructive, nor does it detail the effect of the 'full_page' parameter. The behavioral insight is minimal.

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 short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded with the key purpose. However, it is informal and mixed-language, missing an opportunity to be more structured.

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 with one parameter and an output schema. The description adequately clarifies the relationship with the sibling 'snapshot' tool but fails to explain the 'full_page' parameter or describe the output structure. It is minimally 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It does so for none: the 'full_page' boolean parameter is not described. The description adds no meaning beyond what the schema's name and default value imply.

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?

Description clearly states it is an 'escape hatch' producing a PNG in base64, and contrasts it with the default text snapshot. It distinguishes from the sibling 'snapshot' tool by specifying the output format.

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 phrase 'usa snapshot de texto por defecto, no esto' explicitly tells the agent that the text snapshot is the default, implying this tool is for when a graphical screenshot is needed. Clear context is provided, though no explicit when-not-to-use scenarios are listed.

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