nex_browser_take_screenshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose that the image content is returned only 'when it is small enough,' which is useful, but it does not specify the size threshold, what happens when the screenshot is too large (e.g., saved to file, error), or other side effects.

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?

A single sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the main action. Every word earns its place, including the important size-related caveat. No filler or redundancy.

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 tool with 6 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is too sparse. It leaves open critical details: what the returned MCP image content looks like, behavior when the screenshot is too large, how parameters like fullPage or quality affect results, and what filename is used. The caveat 'small enough' raises more questions than it answers.

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 only 33% (2 of 6 parameters have descriptions), and the tool description adds no parameter semantics. It does not explain 'type', 'quality', 'fullPage', or 'filename', nor how they affect the output. With such low coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 uses the specific verb 'Capture' with the concrete resource 'screenshot', and explicitly states the return behavior ('return MCP image content when it is small enough'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like snapshot, page_url, or get_text.

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 such as nex_browser_snapshot or other inspection tools. The caveat 'when it is small enough' implies a limitation but does not suggest what to use instead for large screenshots, nor any context like 'use for visual verification'.

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