capture_frames

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It mentions the output format and frame spacing, but does not disclose details such as whether the game must be running, how resolution affects results, or error behaviors when the game is not running. This is a significant gap for a capture tool.

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 that front-loads the action and outcome. There is no fluff or repetition.

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?

While the tool is straightforward, the description lacks coverage of key parameters (count, half_resolution) and lacks any usage context relative to sibling screenshot tools. Without annotations or an output schema, the description leaves too many details unaddressed.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the parameters. It only clarifies 'frame_interval' (spacing between frames) but does not mention 'count' or 'half_resolution'. Given three parameters and zero schema coverage, the description fails to adequately compensate.

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 a specific action (capture a burst) on a specific resource (viewport frames from the running game) with output format (base64 PNGs). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_game_screenshot by focusing on a burst of frames.

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 usage for capturing multiple frames but does not explicitly discuss when to use this versus alternatives like get_game_screenshot or compare_screenshots. No conditions or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer the use case.

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