Scrapfly Screenshot Tool

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety and scope profile. The description doesn't add behavioral context beyond the basic action, such as performance characteristics, rate limits, or what happens with complex pages. However, it doesn't contradict the annotations either.

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 ('Screenshot a URL.') that communicates the core purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately front-loaded and earns its place by establishing the fundamental action.

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 tool with 15 parameters, rich schema documentation, and annotations covering safety, the description is minimal but adequate as a starting point. However, it doesn't address output format (no output schema exists) or complex behavioral aspects, leaving some contextual gaps despite the structured data.

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 100% schema description coverage, all 15 parameters are well-documented in the schema itself. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the basic action, so it meets the baseline of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting without compensating for any gaps.

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 'Screenshot a URL' clearly states the verb ('screenshot') and resource ('URL'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this from potential sibling tools like 'web_get_page' or 'web_scrape' that might also involve URL processing, so it doesn't reach the highest clarity level.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'web_get_page' or 'web_scrape'. There's no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or specific scenarios where screenshotting is preferred over other URL interaction methods.

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