Nemeton MCP

by juergenkoller-software

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Local

take_screenshot

Capture a screenshot of a virtual machine display. Provide the VM name to retrieve the current screen image.

Instructions

Capture a screenshot of a VM's display.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "vm": "<vm>"
    },
    "name": "take_screenshot"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`vm`	Yes	VM name or identifier

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 8, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fails to disclose key behaviors like whether the screenshot is saved to a file, returned as a URL, or else. It does not mention if the VM needs to be powered on or if the action is safe and reversible.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence with no wasted words, which is efficient. However, it could include more detail without becoming verbose, so it is not a 5.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema) and lack of annotations, the description is incomplete. It omits details about the screenshot format, where it is stored, and whether it is a blocking operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter 'vm' is already well-described in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Capture') and resource ('screenshot of a VM's display'), making the tool's function immediately clear. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_vm' or 'console_execute' which have different purposes.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when the VM must be running or what to do with the screenshot. It lacks any context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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