Get Video 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 covered. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., what settings are returned or any side effects). It does not contradict the annotations.

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 with no filler or unnecessary information. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Without an output schema, the description should clarify what 'video settings' includes (e.g., resolution, FPS, etc.) to help the agent understand what is returned. The current description is too vague and does not enhance comprehension beyond the tool name. For a getter that returns a structured set of settings, it leaves the agent without adequate context.

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 tool has zero parameters and 100% schema coverage (empty schema). The description does not need to explain parameter behavior. Baseline is 4 when there are no params, and the description adds nothing that could be misleading.

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 'Gets the current video settings' uses a specific verb ('Gets') and targets a specific resource ('video settings'). It clearly distinguishes from the sibling tool obs-set-video-settings, which mutates those settings.

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?

Usage is implied by the getter/setter relationship with obs-set-video-settings, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions. It provides no direct guidance on when to retrieve settings or how it fits into a workflow.

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