capture_baseline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the core behavior: captures a screenshot and saves it as a baseline. It also adds valuable context about using a known-good version. Minor gaps remain (e.g., overwrite behavior, storage location), but the primary side effect is clearly stated.

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, front-loaded with the action, and no redundant content. Every phrase earns its place: action, purpose, usage context, and relation to sibling.

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 capture tool with rich schema annotations and no output schema, the description covers the workflow comprehensively. It explains what the tool does, when to run it, and how to use the result. The sibling context and schema fill in remaining details.

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 the schema already documents all eight parameters. The description adds minimal parameter-specific meaning beyond naming 'name' as the baseline identifier, which is also in the 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?

The description uses a specific verb 'capture' and resource 'screenshot of a URL', clearly states it saves as a visual baseline under a given name. This distinguishes it from siblings like compare_visual, list_baselines, and delete_baseline.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'Run this once on a known-good version of the page' and directs to use compare_visual later, which differentiates from alternatives. This is clear when-to-use and points to relevant sibling.

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