get_view

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not clarify side effects (e.g., whether the active view changes), output format (e.g., file path, base64), or any permissions or limitations. The return value is only vaguely described as 'A screenshot of the active view.'

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 well-organized with Args/Returns sections and is mostly concise. Minor redundancy exists ('Get a screenshot of the active view' repeated in the Returns), but it remains easy to scan and front-loaded.

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?

The parameter documentation is strong, but behavioral context is thin: no side effects, no output format, no usage guidance. The inconsistency between 'active view' in the title and selectable view_name also creates ambiguity. An output schema exists, so return details are less critical, but the description still leaves gaps.

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?

The description adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema: it explains width/height in pixels with viewport defaults, focus_object behavior (fits all objects), and enumerates valid view names. This fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Get a screenshot of the active view.' The verb 'Get' and resource 'screenshot' are specific, and the detailed view_name enum distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_object and get_objects.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are any exclusions or alternative tools mentioned. The description only states the basic operation, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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