get_screenshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear full transparency burden. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or non-destructive. While capturing a screenshot is generally safe, the lack of explicit disclosure about side effects or permissions limits transparency.

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: first states purpose, second adds format detail. No wasted words, front-loaded with key action. Optimal length for this simple tool.

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 tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers essential behavior. Minor omission: doesn't specify if screenshot captures viewport or full page, but this is acceptable given common defaults.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions. The description adds context about PNG/JPEG defaults and size trade-off, enhancing understanding of format and quality parameters beyond the schema enums and integer range.

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 it captures a screenshot of the current monitored tab, with specific output formats. This verb-resource pairing is unambiguous and distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on network, page info, or DOM operations.

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 visual capture, which is distinct from data retrieval tools. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools like get_page_info for textual content. Still, the context is clear.

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