qt_screenshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals key behaviors: the PNG is written to a file at the returned URI, the resource must be read to obtain image bytes, and on failure no image is written and the result reports the error. This is valuable context beyond the schema, though it does not cover all potential side effects.

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 four concise sentences, front-loaded with the main action and followed by necessary operational details. No waste, and every sentence adds value.

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 tool with two simple parameters and a clear output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers the main action, how to retrieve the screenshot bytes, and error behavior. Minor gaps remain around session_id semantics, but the description is sufficient for effective use.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meanings. It explains element_id (0 captures the entire window) but does not clarify session_id. This partial compensation earns a middle score.

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 the tool captures a screenshot of a UI element or the entire window, with a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like qt_snapshot, but the scope is unambiguous enough to understand the primary function.

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 implies usage by explaining how element_id 0 captures the active/first visible top-level window, but it does not provide explicit when-to-use guidance or mention alternatives. It lacks exclusions or comparison with sibling tools, leaving usage context inferred.

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