browser_screenshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions the default save path but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, destructive, or any side effects (e.g., overwriting files, affecting browser state). This is insufficient for a file-saving operation.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the core function. The parenthetical adds context but is somewhat redundant for an AI agent. No unnecessary words, but could be more streamlined.

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 (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description covers the primary function and default location. However, it lacks details on the output format, error cases, or behavior with/without the fullPage parameter, leaving some gaps.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters (only one boolean), and the schema description already explains the parameter's meaning. The tool description adds no extra semantic value beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 takes a screenshot and saves it as a file, with a default path. It distinguishes itself by noting it is for human viewing, not for multimodal models. However, it does not explicitly specify whether it captures the current viewport or the entire page (though the parameter hints at full page).

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 implies the tool is for human consumption, not for AI interpretation, which provides some guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings like browser_snapshot or browser_eval, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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