Open Input Filters

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations; it simply restates the title. It does not mention side effects, error behavior, or that it manipulates the OBS UI. Annotations already indicate idempotency and non-destructiveness, so there is no contradiction, but the description itself contributes no additional 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 succinct sentence with no filler words, front-loading the action and resource.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool, the description is mostly adequate, but it fails to clarify whether at least one parameter is required, or which to prefer when both are provided. It also does not state what happens if the input is not found.

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 schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description does not add any additional semantic information about parameter usage or selection.

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 the specific verb 'opens' and identifies the resource 'filters dialog of an input', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like obs-open-input-properties and obs-open-input-interact.

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 states what the tool does but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it vs alternatives, nor does it explain which parameter to use (inputName vs inputUuid) or any prerequisites.

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