get_camera_snapshot

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It usefully discloses the output format (base64-encoded JPEG image data), but it does not mention side effects, failure modes, latency, or that it is a read-only snapshot beyond the verb 'get.'

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 compact and well-structured: one sentence for purpose and return format, then one focused line per parameter. It contains no filler, and the critical camera_id sourcing instruction is prominently included.

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 getter with two required string parameters and an output schema, the description covers both parameters, the return format, and a clear discovery path for the camera ID. It does not discuss error conditions or host discovery beyond accepted formats, but those are not required for basic selection and invocation.

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 provides no descriptions for either parameter, so the description must compensate. It explains valid host formats (console name, ID, or composite MAC:numericId format) and tells the agent how to obtain camera_id via list_cameras. This is meaningful guidance, though it lacks concrete examples.

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 action and resource: 'Get a snapshot from a Protect camera.' Also clarifies the return format as base64-encoded JPEG image data. It is distinct from sibling getters like get_camera and get_rtsps_stream, but it does not explicitly contrast with them, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Implied usage is clear: use this when a camera snapshot is needed. It also provides a useful prerequisite by pointing to list_cameras for obtaining camera_id. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or provide exclusion cases.

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