Prepare recording

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing that it switches scenes, verifies sources, checks audio/readiness, and reports a summary. It also clearly states it does not start recording. Missing details about side effects like permanently changing the current scene or prerequisites, but core behavior is 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 concise, consisting of two meaningful sentences. The first sentence lists the exact actions in a compact list, and the second adds a crucial disclaimer. No filler or redundant information.

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 description outlines the steps, the final report, and the exclusion of starting recording. It is reasonably complete for a no-parameter tool, though it could mention prerequisites (e.g., OBS running) or potential failure conditions, but these are not critical given the scope.

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, and the schema confirms this with no properties. Per the baseline for 0 params, a score of 4 is appropriate; the description does not need to explain parameter semantics.

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 'Prepare' with a clear resource 'OBS for recording' and details the concrete steps: switch to recording scene, verify sources, check audio and readiness, and report a summary. It explicitly states 'Does NOT start recording,' which clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tool start_recording.

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 makes it clear this is for preparing OBS before recording and explicitly warns it does not start recording, which is a key exclusion. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like prepare_stream for streaming or state when not to use it beyond the recording context.

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