getOgScreenshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the endpoint ('OpenGraph's screenshot endpoint') but does not cover critical traits such as rate limits, authentication needs, response format (e.g., image data or URL), error handling, or performance considerations. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely involves external API calls.

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 that front-loads the core action ('Get a screenshot') without unnecessary details. It earns its place by specifying the resource and method, though it could be slightly more structured for clarity. There is no wasted text, making it appropriately concise.

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 the tool's complexity (involving external screenshot generation) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what is returned (e.g., image data, file path, or error messages), nor does it address behavioral aspects like rate limits or dependencies. This leaves the agent with insufficient information for reliable use.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'url' well-documented in the schema as 'URL of the webpage to screenshot'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as URL format constraints or examples. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the schema handles the parameter documentation adequately.

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 with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('screenshot of a given URL'), and mentions the method ('using OpenGraph's screenshot endpoint'). It distinguishes from some siblings like 'getOgData' or 'getOgExtract' by focusing on screenshots rather than data extraction, though not all sibling differentiation is explicit.

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 'exportImageAsset' or 'generateImage' among the siblings. It implies usage for URL screenshots via OpenGraph but lacks explicit context, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer based on tool names alone.

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