Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• capture_elementC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

  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 states the tool captures screenshots but doesn't mention critical behaviors like network delays, viewport handling, error conditions, or output format (e.g., image data). The description is too minimal for a tool that interacts with webpages and has multiple parameters.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any fluff. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool's complexity (webpage interaction, multiple parameters including nested objects) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., image bytes, file path), error handling, or behavioral details like the 'standardDelay' parameter's effect, leaving significant gaps for agent understanding.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds no additional semantic context about parameters beyond implying 'selector' targets an element, which is already clear from the schema. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the action ('capture a screenshot') and target ('specific element on a webpage'), which is specific and actionable. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from its sibling 'capture_screenshot' (which presumably captures the entire page rather than an element), missing full sibling differentiation.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  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 like 'capture_screenshot' or 'list_device_presets'. There's no mention of prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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

• capture_screenshotC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It mentions 'advanced options' but doesn't explain what these entail (e.g., viewport configuration, wait conditions, delays), nor does it cover performance implications, error handling, or output format. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand tool behavior.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core functionality.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a complex tool with 6 parameters, nested objects, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain the 'advanced options', behavioral traits like performance or errors, or what the tool returns (e.g., image format, size). The agent lacks sufficient context to use this tool effectively.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, providing detailed documentation for all parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the generic 'advanced options' reference, which doesn't clarify individual parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the action ('capture a full-page screenshot') and resource ('webpage'), with the qualifier 'with advanced options' hinting at additional capabilities. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'capture_element' which likely captures specific elements rather than full pages.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'capture_element' or 'list_device_presets'. The description mentions 'advanced options' but doesn't specify scenarios where these are beneficial or when simpler alternatives might suffice.

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

• list_device_presetsB
  3.2/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions listing 'available device presets with their configurations,' which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, how results are returned (e.g., pagination, format), or any rate limits. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, clear sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any fluff or redundant information. It is front-loaded and efficiently communicates the essential action, making it highly concise and well-structured.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate as a basic read operation. However, it lacks details on output format, authentication needs, or error handling, which could be important for an agent. It meets the minimum viable standard but has clear gaps in completeness.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, meaning no parameters are defined. The description doesn't need to add parameter details, so it appropriately avoids redundancy. A baseline of 4 is applied since no parameters exist, and the description doesn't introduce unnecessary complexity.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the action ('List') and the resource ('device presets with their configurations'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools (capture_element, capture_screenshot), which are unrelated capture operations, so it doesn't reach the highest score for sibling differentiation.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  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 or in what context. It simply states what the tool does without indicating prerequisites, timing, or comparisons to other tools, leaving the agent with no usage direction.

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