take_screenshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively states the core action (screenshot webpage) and key constraint (cost of $0.02 USDC via x402), but lacks details about execution time, error conditions (e.g., invalid URLs, timeouts), or image format specifics. The cost disclosure is valuable context beyond basic functionality.

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 extremely concise with just two sentences that are front-loaded with the core functionality. Every word earns its place: the first sentence states the action and resource, while the second adds critical behavioral context (return type and cost). No wasted verbiage.

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 tool's moderate complexity (webpage interaction with financial cost) and lack of both annotations and output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers what the tool does and a key constraint (cost), but omits details about output format (e.g., image type, size), error handling, or performance characteristics that would help an agent use it effectively.

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%, providing complete parameter documentation (url, width, height with defaults). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already specifies, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without compensating with extra insights.

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 specific action ('Take a screenshot') and resource ('any webpage'), with the verb+resource combination making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from all sibling tools, which focus on AI analysis, crypto data, or document generation rather than visual capture.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it mentions a cost, it doesn't specify scenarios where screenshotting is preferable to other methods or tools, nor does it mention prerequisites like URL accessibility or browser compatibility.

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