Capture a TOP preview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description does not contradict this. It adds value by disclosing that the result is returned as MCP image content, which is not obvious from the schema. It does not elaborate on failure modes or timing, but this is acceptable given the read-only annotation.

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?

A single sentence that conveys the core function without redundancy. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and output.

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 capture tool that returns an image, the description covers the essential information: what is captured, the output format, and the return type. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by mentioning 'MCP image content'. It does not discuss resolution or error handling, but these are secondary for this tool.

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 low (33%); only 'path' is described. The description mentions the PNG/JPEG formats, adding meaning to the 'format' parameter, but it does not explain 'quality'. Thus it partially compensates for the schema gap but leaves the quality parameter under-specified.

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 verb (Capture), the resource (TOP), the output formats (PNG/JPEG), and the return type (MCP image content) for visual verification. This distinctly separates it from sibling tools like td_sample_chop (CHOP data) and td_inspect_operator (operator properties).

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 a clear usage context: 'for visual verification'. It implies when this tool is appropriate, but does not explicitly mention alternative tools or when not to use it, which would earn a 5.

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