webtool_screenshot

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

Description mentions 'screenshot' and 'custom device emulation' which are key behaviors, but lacks disclosure on potential side effects (e.g., page loading, resource consumption) or idempotency. Since no annotations, description carries full burden; it adds some context but not complete.

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?

Single sentence, 16 words, front-loaded with verb and resource. No wasted words, but could include more details without losing conciseness.

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?

Despite having 5 parameters including a nested object, the description is minimal. No mention of output format (e.g., returns an image/binary), proxy usage, SSL handling, or required permissions. Given no output schema, more detail needed for completeness.

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 descriptions cover all 5 parameters fully (100% coverage). Description adds no additional meaning beyond the high-level purpose; the mention of 'specific element' echoes the selector parameter already described in schema. Baseline 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?

Description clearly states 'Take a screenshot' with specific target ('webpage or specific element') and custom device emulation. Distinguishes from sibling tools like webtool_readpage which reads content, and webtool_gethtml which gets HTML.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like webtool_readpage or webtool_debug. Does not mention when not to use, prerequisites, or preferred scenarios.

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