screenshot_tcp

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It only mentions the 'SCDP command' without explaining what happens after capture, how output_path interacts with include_base64, whether a connection is required, or what the return value contains. This is insufficient for an agent to anticipate side effects or output.

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 a single sentence, so it is concise in length. However, the phrasing 'through candidate `SCDP` command' is awkward and vague, making it less effective than a clearer, well-structured sentence.

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 two optional parameters and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits what happens when output_path is null, the structure of the base64 output, and any prerequisites such as being connected via TCP. An agent would likely need to inspect other tools or make assumptions.

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?

The input schema shows two parameters (output_path, include_base64) with zero description coverage, and the description does not mention either parameter. The parameter names give partial hints but fail to explain defaults, valid formats, or how they affect the screenshot capture.

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 action ('Capture a screen image') and names the resource ('`SCDP` command'). It effectively differentiates from sibling tools such as measure_tcp or get_waveform_tcp. However, the phrase 'candidate `SCDP` command' is ambiguous and doesn't clarify whether 'candidate' is a typo or a technical term, which slightly reduces clarity.

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 use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites like an active TCP connection, and no exclusions or fallback recommendations. The only implied usage is 'when you need a screenshot,' which is not differentiated from other capture tools.

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