Video Screenshot MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action (batch screenshot capture) but doesn't describe what happens: whether files are saved to disk, if the operation is resource-intensive, potential errors, or output format. For a tool with 11 parameters and no annotations, this is a significant gap in 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 a single, efficient sentence in Chinese that directly states the tool's purpose without redundancy. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, with zero wasted words.

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 complexity (11 parameters, batch file operations) and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like file output location, error handling, or performance implications, leaving the agent with insufficient context for safe and effective use.

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%, with all parameters well-documented in the input schema (e.g., descriptions for 'interval,' 'format,' 'outputDir'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying time-based batch processing. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 tool's purpose: '按固定时间间隔批量截取视频画面' translates to 'batch capture video screenshots at fixed time intervals.' This specifies the verb (capture screenshots), resource (video), and scope (batch at intervals). However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'take_screenshot' (which might capture a single screenshot).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'take_screenshot' or 'get_video_info.' It doesn't mention prerequisites, constraints, or typical use cases. The agent must infer usage from the purpose alone.

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