Set Transition Settings

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

The annotations already declare this as a write, non-destructive, idempotent operation. The description adds valuable context that the tool always operates on the 'current transition', which is not evident from annotations or the schema. This clarifies the scope of the mutation.

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 using clear verb-object phrasing. Every word contributes to meaning, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 (one generic object parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not describe what kinds of settings are valid, how to discover them, or mention the related 'obs-get-transition-settings' for reading current values, leaving some gaps for an AI agent.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% (the only parameter, 'transitionSettings', has a description). The tool description adds no further explanation about the expected structure or valid keys within the settings object, so it does not exceed the baseline set by the schema.

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 'Set' and identifies the resource as 'settings of the current transition'. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'obs-get-transition-settings' (which retrieves settings) and other transition-related tools like 'obs-set-current-transition'.

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. It does not mention that to read current settings you should use 'obs-get-transition-settings', nor does it state any prerequisites or exclusions. The usage is only implied by the verb 'Set'.

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