browser_take_screenshot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by stating that actions cannot be performed from the screenshot, which is behavioral context beyond the annotations. However, it does not elaborate on the return format (e.g., file path or base64), but given the tool's simplicity, this is acceptable.

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 wasted words. The critical information (purpose and usage restriction) is front-loaded and immediately actionable.

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?

Given that there is no output schema, the description could mention the return format (e.g., image file path). However, the annotations and schema are rich, and the tool's behavior is relatively straightforward. The description is largely complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 all parameter descriptions are already present in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, thus baseline score of 3.

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?

Description clearly states 'Take a screenshot of the current page' with a specific verb and resource. It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool browser_snapshot by noting that screenshots cannot be used for actions, which is a key differentiation.

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 provides explicit guidance on when not to use this tool ('can't perform actions based on the screenshot') and directs the agent to the alternative (browser_snapshot). This is a clear usage directive.

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