Set input settings

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

Annotations already convey that this is a write operation that is not idempotent and not destructive. The description adds the valuable behavioral detail that overlay=true preserves unspecified settings, implying that overlay=false may not preserve them. This goes beyond the annotations, though the consequences of overlay=false are not fully spelled out.

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 short sentences with the core action front-loaded. Every phrase contributes either to purpose or to key behavior, with no filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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 parameters and an existing output schema, the description is minimally sufficient but leaves a noticeable gap: it does not say how to identify the target input when inputId and inputName are both individually optional. The overlay behavior is useful, and annotations cover safety semantics, but an agent still needs to infer target-selection rules.

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 adds meaning for the overlay parameter with 'overlay=true preserves unspecified settings', which the schema does not explain. However, it does not clarify the settings object structure or explain the apparent need to provide either inputId or inputName even though only settings is required. Schema descriptions cover inputId and inputName, leaving the description as a partial but not complete supplement.

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 and resource: 'Apply settings to an OBS input.' This clearly identifies it as a setter and distinguishes it from the sibling input_settings_get. The overlay clarification does not obscure the core purpose.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as input_audio_set or input_settings_get. The only usage hint is the overlay parameter behavior, which is more about how to invoke than when to choose this tool.

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