Broadcast Custom Event

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

Annotations already convey it's a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and not destructive. The description adds value by specifying the event type (CustomEvent) and the destination (all WebSocket clients), which goes beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions; it's consistent with the non-read-only nature.

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, compact sentence that immediately states the verb and target. No wasted words, and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

For a simple broadcast tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is sufficient. The schema fully defines the interface, and the tool's behavior is clear without needing further elaboration on return values or complex side effects.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% for the single parameter eventData, which is explained as 'Data payload to emit to all receivers'. The description adds no extra parameter info, but given full schema coverage, baseline 3 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 (broadcasts), the resource (a CustomEvent), and the target (all WebSocket clients). It distinguishes from sibling tools like obs-send-stream-caption, which targets captions specifically, making it 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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternatives are provided, but the purpose is specific enough that an agent can infer it's for sending custom events to clients. There are no competing tools in the sibling list, so minimal guidance is acceptable, though explicit context (e.g., 'use this to emit arbitrary events to connected clients') would improve the score.

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