obs_list_outputs

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

The description transparently explains quirks: plugin outputs use arbitrary labels, width/height may be 0 without indicating breakage, and the key field outputFlags.OBS_OUTPUT_SERVICE indicates service outputs. This goes beyond the schema (which has no annotations) and prevents misinterpretation.

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 overly verbose and repetitive. It repeats 'on the reference machine' multiple times and explains the same points (e.g., width/height being 0) in several sentences. It could be condensed to half the length without losing meaning, which detracts from clarity.

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?

Given the lack of parameters and output schema, the description fully compensates by explaining what the returned list contains, how to identify service outputs, and how to interpret fields like width/height. It provides all necessary context for using the tool effectively.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not add parameter information (none exists), but it does provide context about the output list itself, which is beneficial for interpreting results.

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 tool's function: 'List every output OBS currently has - the stream, the recording, the replay buffer, the virtual camera, and any output contributed by a plugin - with which ones are running right now.' This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like obs_output_status or obs_get_output_settings.

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 explicit usage guidance: 'Start here before touching anything in this module, because the names are not predictable.' This tells the agent when to use this tool and why, making it a clear entry point for output-related operations.

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