get_screen_image

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state the output encoding (base64 PNG) and implies a read-only retrieval, but it does not mention permissions, error behavior, or whether the image is a cached preview versus a live screenshot.

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?

The description is a single, short sentence that states the core action and output format with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 two-parameter read tool, the description is nearly complete: the schema documents parameters, and the description covers the return format since there is no output schema. It lacks only some guidance around when to prefer this over sibling tools, which keeps it from a 5.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already documented. The description adds no extra meaning about how projectId and screenId relate or are used beyond what the schema already states.

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 names a specific action (retrieves), a specific resource (screenshot/preview image of a screen), and the output form (base64-encoded PNG). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_screen or get_screen_code.

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 purpose implies when to use it (when the screen image is needed), but it gives no explicit guidance about alternatives or when not to use it. Compared to siblings such as get_screen or get_screen_code, there is no direct comparison or selection hint.

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