streamlabs_switch_scene

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the mutation ('Switch') but does not explain potential side effects (e.g., changing the active scene may interrupt current streaming), error behavior for invalid scene ids, or whether the operation is asynchronous. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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. It front-loads the action and includes the essential supplementary information (where to get ids). Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or filler.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers the core operation and parameter sourcing. However, it omits any mention of return values, success/failure behavior, or prerequisites (e.g., Streamlabs Desktop must be running). This is a clear gap for an agent that needs to know what to expect after calling the 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?

The schema already describes the single parameter sceneId clearly with 100% coverage. The description adds value beyond the schema by telling the agent where to get valid ids (streamlabs_list_scenes), which is practical semantic guidance. This goes beyond the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 ('Switch Streamlabs Desktop to a different scene') and specifies the resource (a scene identified by its id). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_scene or get_active_scene by focusing on the act of switching. The reference to streamlabs_list_scenes reinforces the specific operation.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (to switch scenes) and explicitly tells the agent how to obtain valid scene ids via streamlabs_list_scenes. It does not mention exclusions or alternative tools, but the usage context is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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