protect_get_snapshot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, establishing the tool is safe and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral context about the return format (base64 image rendered by MCP clients) and quality behavior, but does not cover potential issues like authentication, rate limits, or error scenarios. Value added is moderate beyond annotations.

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 with no wasted words. The first sentence succinctly states purpose and return format; the second provides key parameter guidance. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (two parameters, no output schema), the description fully covers what an agent needs: action, resource, return format, and parameter behavior. No gaps remain for a basic snapshot operation.

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% (both parameters described), but the description adds significant meaning beyond the schema: for highQuality, it explains 'full-resolution capture from the camera's main channel; otherwise a low-res thumbnail', which gives agents a clear understanding of the quality trade-off beyond the boolean schema 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 it gets a JPEG snapshot from a camera, specifies the return format (base64-encoded image/jpeg), and distinguishes from sibling tools which operate on different resources (e.g., get_camera, get_liveview). The verb 'get' and resource 'snapshot' are specific and unambiguous.

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 explains when to use highQuality=true (full-resolution capture) versus false (low-res thumbnail), providing clear parameter usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it, though context from sibling names implies it is the sole snapshot tool.

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