visualize-marketing-tech

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It does not state whether the tool performs its own technology detection, how highlights are rendered, whether the page is modified, or what the screenshot output contains. It also does not mention network/permission implications, so the agent is left without critical operational context.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the essential action and outcome efficiently.

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 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It doesn't clarify whether the tool internally detects technologies or relies on external data, nor does it describe the screenshot format or any side effects. Given the sibling tools, more context would help disambiguate its exact role.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal additional meaning—the word 'detailed' loosely maps to the 'highlightMode' enum but does not explain the difference between 'basic' and 'detailed' beyond the schema's own description.

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 'Take a screenshot with detailed marketing technologies visually highlighted', which identifies the verb, resource, and output. It distinguishes itself from plain screenshot tools and detection tools enough to suggest a visual deliverable, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'highlight-marketing-tools'.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'find-marketing-technologies' or 'puppeteer_screenshot'. There are no stated exclusions or preferred contexts, leaving the agent to infer usage from the purpose alone.

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