niri_take_screenshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return value (path to saved file) and target behavior, but lacks details on file location, format, potential side effects (e.g., saving to disk), or failure conditions. More insight would improve 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?

The description is three concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately clarifying the parameter and return value. No unnecessary text or repetition, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 one-parameter tool, the description covers purpose, parameter semantics, and return value. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return details further. Minor gaps include lack of error conditions or file path behavior, but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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?

The only parameter 'target' is fully explained in the description: 'screen' means entire focused monitor, 'window' means focused window only. Since the schema provides no descriptions and 0% coverage, the description fully compensates and adds meaning beyond the schema.

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 the action ('Capture a screenshot') and the resource ('on Niri DE'), with explicit target options ('screen' or 'window'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools, none of which are screenshot-specific, by specifying its exact purpose.

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 context is clear: this tool is for capturing screenshots. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternative tool recommendations (e.g., if another tool could capture differently). It provides enough context for an agent to select it for screenshot tasks.

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