Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
screenshot-feedback-hook-mcp

screenshot-feedback-hook-mcp

by lkh081231
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

take_screenshot

Capture screen images to view your output, such as frontend pages or CAD drawings. Select a specific monitor or combine all displays.

Instructions

截取屏幕并返回图片，用于查看自己刚产出的真实画面（前端页面、EDA/CAD 图等）。

Args: monitor: 0=所有显示器拼接（默认），1..N=指定单个显示器。 不确定编号时先调 list_monitors。

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
monitorNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It states capture and return image, but lacks details on permissions, scope (full screen vs window), or destructiveness. The implicit read-only nature is not explicitly confirmed.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Description is brief with no fluff. Purpose is stated upfront, and parameter details are in a clear list. Every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter usage, and sibling reference. Could mention default behavior more explicitly, but adequate overall.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Single parameter 'monitor' is explained with clear semantics (0 for all, positive for single) and a practical tip to call list_monitors. This adds significant value beyond the bare schema (0% coverage).

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?

Description clearly states the action (capture screen) and resource (screen), and provides context (viewing produced output like UI or CAD). It also distinguishes from sibling tool list_monitors.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Describes when to use (after producing output) and gives explicit guidance on using list_monitors when uncertain about monitor numbers. Does not specify when not to use, but is sufficient.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools