tv_screenshot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only'. It adds the output type (PNG image) but does not disclose other behavioral details such as auth requirements or failure conditions; for a safe read-only capture tool, the annotations carry most of the burden.

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 two short sentences with no filler: the action and result are front-loaded, and the crop option is stated efficiently. Every word contributes useful information.

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 three optional parameters, a fully descriptive schema, and read-only annotations, the description covers the core action, return type, and the main option. No output schema exists, but 'return it as an image' supplies the necessary return-value information.

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 layout, clip_to_chart, and expect_layout are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds only a brief restatement of clip_to_chart's cropping behavior, which does not materially extend the parameter meaning.

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 opens with the specific verb 'Capture', the resource 'the chart tab', and the output type 'PNG screenshot ... as an image'. This clearly states what the tool does and distinguishes it from every sibling tool, none of which are screenshot-oriented.

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?

It provides clear usage context: capture the chart tab and optionally crop to the chart container, while explicitly noting the tool is read-only. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but no screenshot alternative exists among the siblings, so this is not a material gap.

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