Capture viewport screenshots and bounding boxes to verify page state and self-correct automated e-commerce workflows on Shopee, TikTok Shop, and Lazada.
Capture viewport screenshots and bounding boxes for self-correction
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| simulate | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It states that the tool captures screenshots and bounding boxes but does not mention whether it attaches to an existing browser, whether it is read-only, how results are returned, or the effect of the 'simulate' parameter. This is minimal behavioral context.
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 only one sentence and is easy to parse, with no filler words. However, its brevity sacrifices critical detail about usage and parameters, so it is under-specified rather than efficiently complete.
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 no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented boolean parameter, this description is incomplete. An agent lacks enough information to know when to call it, what 'simulate' does, and what kind of result to expect.
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% and the only parameter 'simulate' is not mentioned in the description. The description adds no meaning beyond the bare boolean schema, leaving an agent unable to understand what simulating the analysis entails.
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 uses a specific verb ('Capture') and names concrete resources ('viewport screenshots and bounding boxes'), with a stated purpose ('for self-correction'). This distinguishes it from sibling ecommerce tools, though 'self-correction' is somewhat vague.
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 phrase 'for self-correction' implies a use case, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any preconditions or exclusions. No sibling comparisons are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.