clikta_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 discloses that the tool captures the current page and saves to a library, and that it is ad-hoc. But it omits whether the screenshot captures the viewport or full page, any return value, or potential side effects beyond saving. This is adequate but not rich.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and adds a clarifying parenthetical. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple tool, the description conveys the main purpose and destination, but contextual gaps remain: the title parameter is undocumented, and behavior like viewport/full-page capture is unspecified. With no output schema or annotations, the description is sufficient for basic selection but not fully complete.

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 only parameter 'title' is optional and has no schema description. The tool description never mentions the title parameter or its purpose, and schema coverage is 0%. The description does not compensate for the lack of parameter documentation.

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 specifies the action ('Take an ad-hoc screenshot'), the target ('current page'), and the destination ('save it to the Clikta screenshot library'). It also differentiates from recording-related flows by explicitly noting it is not tied to a recording step, which distinguishes it from sibling automation tools.

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 phrase 'ad-hoc' and 'not tied to a recording step' imply this tool is for standalone captures rather than screenshots embedded in recordings. However, no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios are stated, leaving some ambiguity about when to prefer a recording-step screenshot.

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