Capture And Analyze

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the two-step capture-then-analyze flow and the VLM provider prerequisite, which is genuine context beyond structured fields, but says nothing about permissions, latency, or failure modes if no provider is configured.

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, zero waste, with the action front-loaded and the prerequisite trailing. Appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the prerequisite is covered. But the undocumented prompt parameter and the absence of any differentiation from capture_screenshot/analyze_screenshot leave gaps for a tool an agent must choose among nine siblings.

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?

There is one parameter (prompt) at 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it. It fails to explain that the prompt drives the visual analysis question, which is the only semantic the schema lacks.

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 states a specific compound action — capture the screen, then analyze it — which is precise about the verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish itself from the closely related siblings capture_screenshot and analyze_screenshot, leaving the agent to infer that this is the combined variant.

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?

"Requires a configured VLM provider" is a useful prerequisite, but there is no guidance on when to prefer this tool over chaining capture_screenshot with analyze_screenshot. The agent gets a precondition but no selection criteria.

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