Capture TradingView chart

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

Annotations already establish read-only, open-world, and idempotent behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond those by specifying that the chart is framed on exactly the trading-day window and that the operation takes 20-40 seconds. No contradiction exists.

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 two short sentences with no wasted words. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the latency warning earns its place as an operational hint.

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 a rich input schema, safety annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the main operational facts: what it captures, the window framing, and the expected delay. It could be slightly more complete by mentioning when to choose this over get_range_chart, but that gap does not undermine correct 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents all five parameters with defaults, examples, and meanings. The description does not need to add parameter-level detail, and does not, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('Screenshot') and resource ('TradingView chart'), and adds a key scoping detail about the trading-day window. It is clear, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like get_range_chart.

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 when to use the tool: whenever a screenshot of a TradingView chart is needed, especially one aligned to a trading-day window. It provides no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives, and the latency note is useful but does not help with sibling selection.

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