Create Source Filter

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only and non-destructive behavior, and the description aligns with that. However, the description does not elaborate on side effects, error conditions, or idempotency (annotations say idempotentHint: false). It could mention potential failures if the filter already exists or if the source is invalid, but overall provides basic transparency.

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, concise sentence that captures the essential action without redundancy. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 is complete for the tool's simple purpose. It does not require explanation of return values (no output schema) and the annotations cover mutability and idempotency hints. It might benefit from a note about prerequisites (e.g., source must exist), but that is implied and not critical.

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?

All parameters are described in the schema with clear, though minimal, explanations. For example, 'filterKind: The kind of filter to be created' and 'sourceName: Name of the source to add the filter to'. No examples or constraints (e.g., valid filter kinds) are provided, limiting depth, but the descriptions add context beyond the parameter names.

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 (creates) and the resource (a filter) and the target (specified source). It distinguishes from sibling tools like obs-set-source-filter-settings or obs-remove-filter by explicitly mentioning creation and adding to a source.

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 when to use this tool (to create a new filter on a source), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. However, the distinct purpose is evident from the name and description, so it's sufficient.

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