obs_record_control

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, but it mostly restates the action enum values. It adds the 'local backup / VOD master' framing but does not disclose what 'query' returns, whether actions are idempotent, or what side effects occur when stopping or pausing.

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 compact sentence with front-loaded verbs and a clarifying parenthetical. Every word earns its place, and no unnecessary detail is included.

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 simple one-parameter control tool, the description is largely sufficient: it names the operations and clarifies which recording target is affected. It could add details about status output or failure modes, but the low complexity keeps the gap minor.

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 single 'action' parameter is fully described by its enum in the schema, and the description paraphrases those values in prose. However, with 0% schema description coverage, the description only minimally compensates; it does not add parameter-specific meaning such as what each action does beyond its name.

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 set — start, stop, pause, resume, query — tied to a clear resource: local recording. The parenthetical 'local backup / VOD master' distinguishes it from sibling tools like obs_stream_control or obs_replay_buffer.

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 clearly identifies the domain ('local recording') and implies separation from streaming or replay-buffer tools. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for selection among the many OBS siblings.

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