Snapshot the current page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the agent knows this is safe. The description adds useful detail about what exactly gets saved, going beyond the annotations. It does not contradict them.

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 with no filler. The action and scope are front-loaded, and the usage hint follows immediately. Every word earns its place.

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, read-only snapshot tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides all essential information: what is saved, where (debug directory), and when to use it. No critical details are missing.

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 schema covers the single parameter 'name' with a description ('Label for the snapshot folder'), and schema coverage is 100%. The tool description does not add any extra meaning to the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb (Save) with a precise resource (current tab) and enumerates exactly what is captured (full-page screenshot, HTML, visible text, network payloads). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like debug_page_text or debug_captures, which capture subsets.

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 provides a concrete trigger scenario: 'Use when a task fails with "Could not find …"' and explains the purpose (so selectors can be updated). It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough.

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