browser_screenshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It adds the output type ('Returns an image') but does not disclose potential side effects, limitations (e.g., element visibility, viewport vs. full page), or whether the operation is read-only. The description provides basic behavioral context but is not thorough.

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 concise, two sentences, and places the action verb first. Every word adds value, with no fluff or repetition of schema details.

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 tool is relatively simple, with only two parameters and full schema descriptions. The description's mention of 'Returns an image' provides sufficient high-level output information. However, it could be more complete by noting that without full_page, only the visible viewport is captured, though this is already implied by the schema's full_page description.

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 100%, with both parameters (selector, full_page) having clear descriptions in the schema. The tool description does not add meaning beyond the schema, apart from reinforcing that a full page or element can be targeted. Baseline of 3 applies because the schema handles the semantic burden adequately.

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 with a specific verb ('Take a screenshot') and resource ('page or an element'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like browser_get_text and browser_get_html by focusing on visual capture rather than text or DOM extraction.

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 description implies usage for capturing visual representations of a page or element, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. It lacks clear 'when to use' or 'when not to use' guidance, leaving the agent to infer from the sibling tool names.

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