streamlabs_create_source

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the source is not added to any scene, which is a behavioral trait. However, it does not mention potential side effects, return values, or error conditions, but the disclosed trait is significant.

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 sentences, concise and front-loaded with the main action. The parenthetical guidance about alternatives adds value without unnecessary length.

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?

The description clarifies the workflow context but lacks details about settings object structure, valid source types, or expected outcomes. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, this leaves gaps, but the description is not misleading and covers the key differentiator.

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 description does not elaborate on the 'name', 'type', or 'settings' parameters. The schema covers 'type' with examples but lacks descriptions for 'name' and 'settings'. With only 33% schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not add parameter-level meaning.

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 that the tool creates a new source without adding it to a scene, which is a specific action. It also distinguishes this tool from siblings like streamlabs_create_and_add_source and streamlabs_add_source_to_scene.

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 explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool versus alternatives: use this to create a source standalone, then use streamlabs_add_source_to_scene afterward, or use streamlabs_create_and_add_source for both. This gives clear usage context.

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