screenshot

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It explains the two modes, saving options, and interpolation limiting file size. However, it does not mention error handling, auth needs, or return format details (though output schema exists). The description is adequate but missing some behavioral context.

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 and well-structured: a brief overall purpose, then a parameter list with detailed explanations. It front-loads the main functionality and each sentence adds value. No unnecessary fluff.

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 6 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema exists, the description covers the core functionality and parameter usage. It explains both modes and key options. However, it omits some edge cases (e.g., error if axis without slice_range) and does not reference the output schema for return values. Overall, fairly complete for an agent to use correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description does a good job explaining all 6 parameters: canvas_only, save_path, axis, slice_range, interpolate_to_fit, save_dir. It provides clear semantics, including slice string examples and interpolation purpose. However, it does not explain the anyOf types (e.g., string alternatives for boolean) and misses details on default return when no save_path given.

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: taking a screenshot or timelapse series. It distinguishes between two modes (single vs timelapse) with specific parameter guidance. The verb 'take' and resource 'screenshot' are precise, and no sibling tool has similar functionality.

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 explicit usage guidance: when to use single screenshot (no axis/slice_range) vs timelapse (provide both). It explains parameters like canvas_only, save_path, and interpolation. However, it lacks explicit 'when not to use' or comparison to alternatives, though no similar siblings exist.

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