Start stream

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the high-impact nature (visible to viewers) and the confirmation requirement, which are critical behavioral traits. However, it does not mention potential failure conditions (e.g., already streaming) or additional side effects, though these may be less critical for a simple start action.

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 two sentences: the first states the action, the second provides the critical warning and requirement. It is front-loaded, concise, and every word earns its place with no 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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no annotations, output schema present), the description covers the essential points: what the tool does and the key requirement. It does not mention prerequisites like checking stream status first, but the output schema and sibling tools (e.g., get_stream_status) can fill that gap. Overall, it is adequately complete for a naive agent.

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 0% description coverage, but the description adds meaning to the sole 'confirm' parameter by stating that explicit user confirmation is required, implying the parameter must be true. This goes beyond the default-false schema definition and helps the agent use the parameter correctly.

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 the specific verb 'Start' with the resource 'live stream', making the action unambiguous. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like stop_stream and get_stream_status, and the mention of high impact adds purpose context.

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 clear usage condition: explicit user confirmation is required before going live. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the high-impact warning serves as a strong guideline for when and how to use the tool.

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