Get Group Scene Items

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

The annotations clearly mark this as read-only and idempotent, but the description adds no extra behavioral context such as error conditions, return format, or handling of invalid group names. Since the annotations already cover the safety profile, the description needed to explain the group semantics and it failed to do so.

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 is easy to read and directly to the point. However, its extreme brevity sacrifices essential details, which is a significant drawback despite being efficiently written.

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 tool is severely underspecified: there is no output schema, no required parameters, and no explanation of how to identify the group. The three optional scene-related parameters are ambiguous, and the agent receives zero guidance on correct invocation. This is completely inadequate for a tool that requires precise parameterization.

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?

Although the schema has 100% coverage, the description adds no meaning beyond the parameter names and their short descriptions. Critically, there is no parameter for the group, and the description does not clarify how the group is identified via scene/canvas parameters. An agent cannot determine how to specify which OBS group to query, making the tool unusable.

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 restates the title almost verbatim, providing no additional clarity about the group identifier. It fails to distinguish this tool from the sibling obs-get-scene-items, and the missing group parameter makes the actual purpose confusing. A verb and resource are present, but the lack of group specification makes it vague and misleading.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool as opposed to alternatives like obs-get-scene-items, nor any prerequisites such as obtaining a group reference. The only hint is the tool's name itself, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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