obs_video_settings

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

The description discloses an important behavioral constraint (stream must be stopped for changes), but it does not mention potential side effects, failure modes, or whether the 'get' operation also requires the stream to be stopped. Without annotations, more transparency would be expected.

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 concise and to the point, using a single sentence to convey the core function and an important precondition. There is no unnecessary information or redundancy.

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 that the tool can both get and set settings, and has six parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what each parameter represents, the return format for 'get' operations, or any additional context needed for correct usage. The description only scratches the surface.

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 schema has six numeric parameters with no descriptions, and the description only vaguely mentions canvas, output resolution, and FPS. It does not map parameters to these concepts, nor does it specify units, ranges, or typical values. This leaves the parameters poorly understood.

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 purpose: to get or set canvas, output resolution, and FPS. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on video settings, making its function unambiguous.

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 a key usage guideline: changing settings requires the stream to be stopped. However, it does not elaborate on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other OBS tools), but the main precondition is covered.

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