streamlabs_rotate_scene_item

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'rotate' without clarifying whether the rotation is absolute or relative, whether it overwrites the current rotation, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a mutation operation.

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, focused sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise and immediately communicates the core action.

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 four required parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is drastically under-specified. It doesn't explain what identifiers are needed, how degrees behaves, or what the expected outcome is, leaving critical gaps for an agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter semantics. It only mentions 'degrees' in passing and fails to explain the role of sceneId, sceneItemId, or sourceId. The meaning of 'degrees' itself (e.g., clockwise, relative) is not elaborated.

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 rotates a scene item by a given number of degrees, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like set_scene_item_transform or flip, as it specifically addresses rotation by degrees.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as using set_scene_item_transform for full transform control. The description doesn't mention any exclusions or typical scenarios.

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