Skip to main content
Glama
redf0x1

camofox-mcp

by redf0x1
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

screenshot

Capture a base64 PNG image of the current viewport or full scrollable page for visual verification of CSS, layout, or proof.

Instructions

Take a viewport or full-page visual screenshot in base64 PNG. Set fullPage to capture the entire scrollable page. Use ONLY for visual verification (CSS, layout, proof). Prefer snapshot for most tasks — much more token-efficient.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tabIdYesTab ID from create_tab
fullPageNoCapture the entire scrollable page instead of only the current viewport

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.15.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / fullPage
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Capture the entire scrollable page instead of only the current viewport",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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 output format (base64 PNG), the viewport vs. full-page behavior via the fullPage flag, and the cost trade-off (token inefficiency). It could mention that the return is a string or indicate side effects, but for a screenshot tool this is sufficient.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three concise sentences with no fluff. The action is front-loaded, and each sentence adds value: action/format, parameter guidance, and usage preference.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite no output schema, the description explains the return format (base64 PNG) and the tool's scope. It covers purpose, usage, and key parameter behavior, making it complete for a two-parameter screenshot tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% for both parameters. The description adds some context (e.g., 'viewport' vs 'full-page') but largely restates what the schema already documents, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's action: 'Take a viewport or full-page visual screenshot in base64 PNG.' It also distinguishes from siblings by noting the visual nature and explicitly contrasting with 'snapshot for most tasks.'

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit when-to-use guidance is provided: 'Use ONLY for visual verification (CSS, layout, proof). Prefer snapshot for most tasks — much more token-efficient.' This directly addresses alternatives and exclusions.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools