streamlabs_stretch_scene_item_to_screen

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the primary behavior (stretch to fill, ignoring aspect ratio), but does not mention any side effects, prerequisites, or whether other transform properties are affected. This adds context beyond the tool name but lacks depth.

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 that is direct and free of any unnecessary words. Every part earns its place by conveying the exact purpose and the key exception (aspect ratio).

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 tool has three required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. While the operation itself is simple, the description does not clarify the relationship between sceneItemId and sourceId, nor how to obtain these IDs. It is sufficient only if the agent already understands the domain, leaving gaps for a general-purpose assistant.

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 zero description coverage for its three parameters (sceneId, sceneItemId, sourceId), and the description provides no additional meaning for any of them. The description fails to compensate for the lack of parameter documentation, leaving the agent to rely on names alone.

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 uses a specific verb ('Stretch') with a clear resource ('scene item') and outcome ('fill the entire canvas'), and notably clarifies that it ignores aspect ratio. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool fit_scene_item_to_screen, which would preserve aspect ratio.

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 the use case: stretch an item to fill the canvas without preserving aspect ratio. However, it does not explicitly contrast it with the fit tool or provide guidance on when to choose one over the other, leaving usage context only implied.

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