Start replay buffer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses one key behavioral trait (requires OBS enabled), but does not explain error behavior, idempotency, or the effect of starting an already-running buffer. For a mutating action, this is a minimal but acceptable disclosure.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and includes a critical prerequisite. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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 simplicity of the tool (no parameters, output schema present), the description is nearly complete. It mentions the OBS-enabled requirement, which is essential context. It does not elaborate on return values, but the presence of an output schema makes that unnecessary. It could benefit from noting whether the command is idempotent, but is otherwise adequate.

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 is an empty object with 100% coverage. The description adds no parameter-specific information, but since there are no parameters to explain, the baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 action ('Start the replay buffer') with a specific resource and verb, distinguishing it from siblings like stop_replay_buffer and save_replay_buffer. The phrase 'requires it to be enabled in OBS' adds a useful condition but does not obscure the core purpose.

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 clear context by noting the prerequisite that the replay buffer must be enabled in OBS. It implies when to use this tool (after enabling the replay buffer), though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. Sibling tools like get_replay_buffer_status exist but are not referenced.

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