Снимок страницы (отладка)

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly lists the returned data (URL, title, text) and the screenshot action. However, it does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., file creation) or confirm the tool is read-only regarding page state.

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 only two sentences: the first states the primary function, the second gives a practical use case. No redundant details or fluff; it is front-loaded and efficiently written.

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, it covers the core functionality but leaves gaps: the screenshot parameter is unexplained, the output format is not described, and no prerequisites (e.g., being on a page) are mentioned. It is adequate 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 input schema has one boolean parameter 'screenshot' with no description, and the tool description never explains that this parameter controls whether a screenshot is saved. The agent must infer the meaning from the parameter name, which is a significant gap given 0% schema description coverage.

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 returns URL, title, and page text, and saves a screenshot, with a specific debugging purpose ('help adjust selectors when site layout changes'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle navigation, login, or other actions.

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 gives a clear use case: when site layout changes and you need to adjust selectors. It implies when to use the tool but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so a small gap remains.

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