Set Input Audio Monitor Type

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false (mutable) and idempotentHint=true. The description confirms the mutation action and the setting behavior, but doesn't add extra context like side effects or the exact enum values. It doesn't contradict 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 that is front-loaded with the action. It's efficient and to the point, with no wasted words.

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 (2 required params, no output schema), the description is complete. It doesn't explain the return value, but that's not needed since it's a setter. The annotations and schema fill in the rest.

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 has 100% coverage for both parameters, with descriptions of 'inputName' and 'monitorType'. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the title and schema, but the schema itself is sufficient. Baseline 3, but the description's clarity on the setting action slightly enhances usage understanding.

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 ('Sets the audio monitor type') and the resource ('an input'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like obs-get-input-audio-monitor-type. However, it doesn't explicitly mention the valid values for monitorType, which are already in the schema.

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 (setting audio monitor type for an input), but doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives or any prerequisites. Sibling tools like obs-get-input-mute or obs-set-input-volume are related but context-specific, and no exclusions are stated.

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