playwright_screenshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but only states the basic action without details on permissions, side effects, output format (e.g., file vs. base64), or error handling. It mentions 'take a screenshot' but doesn't clarify if this is a read-only operation or has other behavioral traits like rate limits or dependencies.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every part earns its place by specifying the action and scope, making it appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It lacks information on output format, behavioral context, and usage guidelines, which are crucial for an AI agent to invoke it correctly without structured support from annotations or output schema.

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%, providing detailed descriptions for all 8 parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond implying a 'selector' for element targeting, which is already covered in the schema. This meets the baseline of 3 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.

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

The description clearly states the action ('take a screenshot') and the target ('current page or a specific element'), which provides a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from potential screenshot alternatives among its siblings (like playwright_save_as_pdf), though no direct screenshot sibling exists in the provided list.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or context for invocation. It lacks explicit when/when-not statements or references to sibling tools, leaving usage entirely implicit based on the action described.

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