Lists all 10 Cuecaps caption styles with their style IDs, names, and visual appearance so you can select the correct style value when captioning videos.
The 10 Cuecaps caption styles: the id to pass as style, the name, and how each one looks.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the return payload (id, name, appearance), which is the relevant behavior for a static lookup. It stops short of confirming it is a side-effect-free read or whether results are fixed at ten.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; every clause (count, returned fields, downstream use) earns its place.
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?
No output schema exists, so the description must describe return values, and it does so for all three fields. For a zero-parameter enumeration tool this is nearly sufficient, though a hint about ordering or stability would complete it.
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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The mention of 'the id to pass as style' adds cross-tool meaning about how the returned identifier is consumed, which the empty schema cannot convey.
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?
Names the specific resource (the 10 Cuecaps caption styles) and enumerates what comes back: id, name, and visual description. It is clearly distinguishable from the siblings (which are link/auth/video/transcription tools), but it never uses an explicit verb like 'list' — the scope is inferred from the title-style phrasing.
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 phrase 'the id to pass as style' implicitly signals the downstream use with a captioning tool, which is useful routing context. However, it states no explicit when-to-use condition or exclusion, and never names a sibling tool to pair it with.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.