take_system_screenshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the default save location and cross-platform tool dependencies but does not mention return behavior (e.g., file path or binary), permission requirements, or failure modes.

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 concise with 4 sentences, front-loading the main action. It effectively uses bullet-like information for cross-platform details and mode instructions, though it could be slightly more structured.

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 9 parameters including a nested object and no output schema, the description covers default directory and platform support but omits return value, error handling, and comparison with the sibling tool. 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minor value by specifying default output directory and that windowName is an app name, but the schema already describes all parameters 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 'Capture desktop, window, or region screenshot' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'take_screenshot' by specifying cross-platform support and modes.

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 clear context for when to use each mode (fullscreen, window, region) and gives examples for window mode. However, it lacks guidance on when not to use this tool versus the sibling 'take_screenshot', missing explicit exclusion or alternative differentiation.

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