streamlabs_create_scene_collection

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It clearly states the side effect of switching to the new collection, which is a useful behavioral disclosure. However, it omits potential edge cases (e.g., behavior if a collection with the same name exists) and does not describe permissions or reversibility, leaving some gaps.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It conveys the action, the resource, the initial state (empty), and the side effect (switch) in 14 words, earning every word's place.

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 one-parameter create tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core purpose, the parameter, and the switching side effect. It is sufficiently complete for the tool's simplicity, though a note on duplicate-name behavior would push it to 5.

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 schema has one parameter (name) with 0% coverage, so the description must add meaning. The phrase 'with the given name' explicitly maps the parameter to its purpose, making it clear that the name is used for the new scene collection. This compensates for the schema's lack of description.

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 specifies a concrete verb ('Create') and resource ('scene collection'), with clear qualifiers ('new, empty') and a distinct behavioral outcome ('switch to it'). This differentiates it from related tools like create_scene (creates a scene, not a collection) and load_scene_collection (loads an existing one).

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 usage (when you need a new empty scene collection and want to switch to it), but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or conditions when this tool should be preferred. No disambiguation against load_scene_collection or create_scene is provided.

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