obs_get_input_settings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey side effects by itself. 'Read' and 'get' hint at a non-mutating and safe operation, but the description does not explicitly disclose auth/denial/errors/return contents, and there is no annotation to confirm read-only behavior.

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?

One short sentence, fully front-loaded, no filler or redundant phrases.

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 parameter set is simple (1 required, fully documented) and the purpose is narrow; however, there is no output schema and return shape/error semantics are not described, so completeness is good but not complete.

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 coverage is 100% but the schema only defines inputName with a terse description. The tool description adds context that this is one named input's full settings object encompassing resolution, deviceId, URL, file path and similar configuration fields.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'read' with distinguishing scope 'full settings object of one input', mentioning fields like resolution, device id, URL, and file path. It clearly contrasts with output-settings tools and other input tools, though it does not explicitly rule out sibling tools.

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?

Description implies this is for when the settings object of one named input is needed, but it does not state when to prefer this over related tools, nor when not to use it.

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