Read a screenshot artifact

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description earns credit by adding non-obvious lifecycle behavior: artifacts expire after roughly 30 minutes or when the user stops sharing, which materially affects retry/error handling and is not in any structured field.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the core return behavior front-loaded and the expiry caveat immediately after. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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?

With no output schema, the description must sketch return content, and it does so only coarsely ('metadata or the image'). It also leaves local_file (a valid mode) and the artifact_id constraint unaddressed, so an agent hitting those branches is under-informed.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, yet it explains only two of the three mode values (metadata and bounded_image) and says nothing about local_file. artifact_id format is also untouched, leaving the enum's third branch and the required identifier under-explained.

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 (Return) and resource (an artifact from browser_screenshot), naming metadata vs image as the payload. It links itself to the sibling browser_screenshot as the producer, which helps an agent route between the two. Sibling differentiation is implicit rather than explicit, keeping it just short of a 5.

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?

It gives a usable condition for invocation: 'if its access is still valid,' plus the expiry window. However, it never states when to choose this over other read paths or what to do when access has lapsed, so the guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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