Get Preview Scene

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds the 'Studio Mode' condition, which is relevant behavior beyond the annotations. No contradictions, and no side effects are implied beyond the getter 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 concise sentence that conveys the purpose and context without any filler. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every word adds value.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete enough. It identifies the specific operation and meaningful domain (Studio Mode). Given the simplicity and strong annotations, no further explanation about return values is necessary.

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?

There are zero parameters, so per guidelines the baseline is 4. The description adds nothing about parameters, but none are needed; the schema is empty and fully documented by existing coverage.

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: 'Get the current preview scene' with the specific scope 'in OBS Studio Mode'. This distinguishes it from sibling 'obs-get-current-scene' which likely returns the program scene, and it names the exact resource and context.

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 implies usage in Studio Mode, which is a key context, but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like 'obs-get-current-scene' or mention when not to use it. However, for a simple getter, the intent is clear and the mode mention provides sufficient context.

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