sim_screenshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says what is captured but not where the image goes (file path, base64 return), whether the emulator boots the ROM on its own, whether a prior build/run is required, or any cost/time implications of advancing emulation to timeSeconds.

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 filler or redundancy. It is efficient, though its brevity leaves the gaps noted in other dimensions rather than wasting words.

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 7-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits the return value entirely (image path vs inline data) and says nothing about build/boot prerequisites implied by appBin, ptableBin and bootloaderBin. An agent would have to guess how to consume the result.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 7 parameters including chip, board, binary paths and timeSeconds. The phrase 'at a specified emulated time' merely restates timeSeconds, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 (captures) and a precise resource (snapshot image of the virtual LCD/TFT display buffer) plus the timing scope. An agent can tell this apart from sim_run/sim_script by the display-capture framing, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 gives no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance. It does not clarify the relationship to sim_run (does the emulator need to be running/built first?) or when a screenshot is preferable to scripted assertions via sim_expect.

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