screenshot

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

The description discloses useful behavior: save=true writes a timestamped copy into <output_folder>/captures, and paused views yield a stale frame. However, this write-to-disk side effect is enabled by default while annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which would lead an agent to assume no side effects occur. The behavioral detail is good but conflicts with the declared safety profile.

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?

Three short clauses with the core action front-loaded, followed by the save semantics and the paused-state caveat in priority order. Efficient, with no filler, though the embedded references to other tools make it slightly dense.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must carry the return contract, but it only says the view is 'rendered as image' without stating whether an image payload, a file path, or a reference is returned. The paused-view behavior is covered, but the return shape remains ambiguous.

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 a single parameter with 0% schema description coverage, and the description fully compensates by defining what save=true does (timestamped copy retained in the captures folder). The default value's consequence is therefore inferable, which is more than the bare schema provides.

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 and resource: capturing the live KeyShot real-time view rendered as an image. It is distinguishable from render_image (a full render) and view_image, though it never names those siblings explicitly to sharpen the contrast. The scope is clear enough for an agent to select it correctly.

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?

Explicitly handles the main edge case: if the view is paused, the capture shows the last computed frame, and the agent is routed to keyshot_status (paused) and set_realtime. What's missing is guidance on when to choose this over render_image/view_image, but the conditional usage context is well above average.

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