obs_studio_transition

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the studio-mode requirement and error code 506, the asynchronous return before the transition finishes, the inability to override the selected transition, and the preview/program swap trap when called twice in a row. This is exceptionally transparent.

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 front-loaded with the action, uses bold 'TRAPS' structure for readability, and every sentence provides necessary safety or timing guidance. Despite its length, no sentence is wasted, and the numbered trap list makes the critical warnings scannable.

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 an irreversible, parameterless, async studio-mode action with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers prerequisites, error conditions, post-call verification timing, transition-selection constraints, and repeated-call behavior. It is fully complete for safe invocation.

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 schema already defines everything; the baseline is 4. The description adds meaningful explanation by explicitly stating that the request 'takes no parameters and cannot override' the transition, reinforcing and explaining why the empty schema is correct.

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 opens with a vivid 'CUT TO AIR' and immediately states the precise action: 'Runs the current transition, taking whatever is in preview to program.' It clearly distinguishes this from direct scene switching by explaining it is the studio-mode equivalent, so the agent knows the resource and effect.

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 gives strong usage context: read obs_preview_scene, view a screenshot before calling, and treat the call as seriously as a direct program switch. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool to use instead, but it clearly frames when this tool applies and what prerequisites exist.

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