get_snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a non-destructive read by nature of 'capture a frame,' but says nothing about the return format (image/blob?), resolution, latency, or whether a live printer connection is required. For an unannotated tool this is a significant gap.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words that clearly names the action and the target. It is efficient, though minimal enough that it could have afforded one more clause of useful context.

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 one-optional-parameter tool this is close to adequate, and 'camera frame' gestures at the return type despite there being no output schema. Still, it leaves the agent guessing about the actual response shape and any connection requirements.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the single printer_id parameter is already documented as optional when only one printer is configured. The description adds nothing about the parameter beyond what the schema states, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb (capture) and resource (live camera frame from the printer), so an agent immediately knows the action and target. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings, but no sibling overlaps this function, so the differentiation is implicit rather than stated.

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 'live camera frame' implies the tool is for visually inspecting a printer's current state, giving implied usage. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites (e.g. printer must be online), and no named alternative for the closely related printer_status.

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