snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden, and it does add useful behavioral context: the output format (JPEG), the scaling behavior, and the source resolution (1920x1080). However, it says nothing about latency, whether the screen must be active, or what happens on failure, which are meaningful gaps for a no-annotation tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states the resource, format, and scaling in order of importance. No filler, though it is quite terse for a tool with no annotations.

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 simple one-parameter screenshot tool this covers the essentials (format, dimensions, scaling), and no output schema is needed since the return is a JPEG image. It stops short of operational context like preconditions or failure behavior, leaving moderate gaps.

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 schema only shows 'max_width' as an integer with default 1280. The description compensates by explaining that the image is scaled to max_width and that the source is 1920x1080, which adds real meaning, but it omits whether aspect ratio is preserved or units.

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 resource (the current PS5 screen) and output format (JPEG), which clearly distinguishes it from control-oriented siblings like press, hold, and stick. It lacks an explicit verb ('capture'/'take') but the noun phrase is unambiguous about what the tool returns.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus alternatives such as show_viewer, nor any mention of prerequisites like needing an active screen. Usage must be entirely inferred from the name and output description.

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