studio_screenshot

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, indicating a safe, local write operation. The description adds the constraint 'No arbitrary file access,' which is useful context beyond annotations. However, it doesn't disclose details like whether the attachment is reversible, required permissions, or any rate limits.

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 short sentences with no waste; the main action is front-loaded. However, the second sentence is somewhat terse and could be integrated more smoothly.

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 3-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It omits why parameters are needed, prerequisites, and any failure modes, which an agent would need to invoke it 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% for all three required parameters (runId, pageId, file). The description only names formats (PNG, JPEG, WebP) but does not explain the meaning of runId, pageId, or the expected format for file, leaving parameters entirely undocumented.

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 (attach) and resource (PNG/JPEG/WebP screenshot inside the selected project), which is clear. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like studio_snapshot or studio_save_settings, so it lacks sibling differentiation for a 5.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as studio_snapshot or studio_preferences. The usage context is implied only by 'inside the selected project' and 'No arbitrary file access,' which is insufficient.

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