take_screenshot

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

The description discloses that it uses 'screencapture -x' with no shutter sound, returns the image inline, and optionally saves to a file path. These behaviors go beyond the annotations (all false) and give the agent a clear expectation of side effects.

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 concise sentences front-load the core action and then add the macOS constraint and implementation detail. Every sentence earns its place with no unnecessary words.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the platform (macOS), behavior (entire screen, inline image, optional file save), and implementation nuance (no shutter sound). This is sufficient for an agent 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?

The input schema already provides a clear description for the single 'path' parameter (e.g., usage and default behavior). The tool description only repeats 'Optionally saves to a file path' without adding new semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'Capture' and resource 'entire screen', and clarifies the result is an inline image. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_clipboard or generate_image, and any ambiguity is eliminated by the explicit macOS-only constraint.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool (to capture a full-screen screenshot) and provides an important exclusion (macOS only). While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, none of the sibling tools perform screenshots, so no further guidance is necessary.

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