Set media speed

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

Annotations indicate a mutation tool (readOnlyHint=false) but are sparse. The description adds critical behavioral context: 'OBS restarts/reinitializes the media when this setting changes,' which is not disclosed by annotations. This warns the agent of a disruptive side effect. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences: the first states purpose and range, the second discloses the side effect. Both are front-loaded and essential, with zero redundancy. The description is efficiently structured for quick agent parsing.

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 description covers the core action and its notable side effect. However, it omits guidance on choosing between mediaId and mediaName, which is not clear from the schema either. Since an output schema exists (not shown), return values are not a concern. The missing parameter-selection context makes it incomplete for an agent to confidently call 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?

Schema covers mediaId and mediaName with descriptions, but speedPercent lacks a description in the schema. The description clarifies speedPercent as a percent with range 1-200, adding some value. However, it does not explain the relationship or selection between mediaId and mediaName, leaving ambiguity for a key parameter choice. With 67% coverage, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 states a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('Media Source playback speed') with an explicit range (1-200). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like media_play or media_control by focusing on speed adjustment. The side-effect note further clarifies its unique role.

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 use for changing playback speed but does not explicitly differentiate from alternatives such as media_control or media_play. There is no mention of when to use this tool versus others, nor any exclusions or prerequisites beyond the implicit need for an existing media source. The side-effect warning is useful but not a usage guideline.

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