browser_screenshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It fails to mention that the screenshot captures only the viewport by default, that fullPage is available, or how the output is returned (e.g., base64). Basic behaviors like these are essential for an agent to anticipate the tool's effect.

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 but lacks structure. While it wastes no words, it could be more informative without becoming verbose. For example, adding a note about output format would improve utility without sacrificing brevity.

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?

Given the tool has 2 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., screenshot data as base64), how to interpret the result, or any side effects. For a simple tool, this level of detail is insufficient for robust agent usage.

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 100% (both 'quality' and 'fullPage' have descriptions), so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so no improvement is warranted.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Take a screenshot' and the resource 'current page', making the purpose unambiguous. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools that also capture page content (e.g., browser_html, browser_text), so it misses the chance to clarify when each is appropriate.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it specify conditions or exclusions. For example, it does not mention that browser_screenshot is for visual capture while browser_html is for HTML structure. This lack of context makes it harder for an agent to select the right tool.

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