Get Output Settings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds no behavioral detail beyond the fact that it retrieves settings, and it does not mention return format, error behavior, or edge cases.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant information. It is appropriately concise for a simple getter tool.

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 simple, with one well-documented parameter and strong annotations, but there is no output schema and the description does not explain what the returned settings include or how invalid output names are handled. It is adequate for a basic read-only tool but lacks some contextual detail.

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 input schema fully covers the only parameter, outputName, with a description ('Output name'), giving 100% schema coverage. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 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 uses a specific verb ('Gets') and resource ('settings of an output'), clearly stating what the tool does. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like obs-get-output-status and obs-set-output-settings by focusing on retrieving settings rather than status or modifying them.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as obs-get-output-status or obs-set-output-settings. It only restates the function without context, prerequisites, or exclusion criteria.

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