Capture website screenshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool renders in a real Chromium browser and automatically removes ads and cookie banners, which is helpful. However, it does not mention potential side effects, rate limits, execution time, or authentication requirements. It also does not clarify whether the screenshot is destructive or what happens to the browser instance after capture.

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 two sentences long, making it relatively concise. The first sentence states the core action, and the second lists major features. It avoids extraneous details but could be slightly more compact by combining the two sentences or trimming the feature list slightly.

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 complexity of the tool (13 parameters, no output schema), the description provides a high-level overview of capabilities but lacks detail on return format (e.g., image type, resolution), error handling, and how features like 'full_page' work in practice. It is adequate for an experienced user but incomplete for a novice.

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 covers all 13 parameters with descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description reiterates some schema concepts (viewport sizing, full-page capture, country proxies) but does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema already provides. For example, 'country' parameter is explained in the schema; the description only mentions 'country proxies' generically. 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?

The description clearly states it takes a screenshot of a web page using Site-Shot and returns an image. It mentions features like viewport sizing, full-page capture, and ad removal. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'capture_full_page', which may cause confusion.

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 lists features but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'capture_full_page'. It does not mention any prerequisites or conditions for use, nor does it explain when to use the 'full_page' parameter or when to prefer a different tool.

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