streamlabs_flip_scene_item_y

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states the action without disclosing mutations, reversibility, prerequisites, or effects on the scene item's transform. No mention of whether the flip toggles or persists, or any side effects on other properties.

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 concise sentence that immediately conveys the core action. No filler or redundancy; front-loaded with the verb and direction.

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?

While the tool action is simple, the description is extremely sparse given no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter explanations. It lacks any context about prerequisites, usage scenarios, or how this relates to sibling transform tools, making it incomplete for a 3-required-parameter mutation tool.

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 has 3 required parameters with no descriptions (0% coverage). The description does not explain the roles of sceneId, sceneItemId, and sourceId or how they are used to identify the target item. It fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 (flip), the resource (scene item), and the direction (vertically), which distinguishes it from the sibling tool for horizontal flip (streamlabs_flip_scene_item_x). The verb and resource are specific and unambiguous.

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 indicates the tool flips a scene item vertically, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like streamlabs_flip_scene_item_x, rotate, or transform tools. Usage is only implied by the vertical direction, with no exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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