Set Video Settings

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

Annotations already convey readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context—it does not explain what happens on a partial update, whether all parameters must be provided or can be omitted, or any side effects. Since annotations cover the basic safety traits but the description contributes nothing beyond that, a 2 is appropriate.

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 sentence with no filler or redundant information. It is extremely concise and front-loaded, making it easy to parse.

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?

With six optional parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse to be complete. It does not clarify whether all settings are required, what happens if only some are provided, or what 'current video settings' entails. The tool complexity demands more guidance than this one-liner provides.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter has a description in the schema itself. The description text adds no parameter-level information beyond the schema. Per the rubric, baseline is 3 when schema covers all parameters, so this is adequate.

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) and the resource (current video settings). It is distinguishable from sibling getter tools like obs-get-video-settings, though it does not enumerate exactly which settings are affected. This is sufficient for a basic purpose but lacks specificity about the actual settings (resolution, FPS).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, when it is appropriate to invoke, or that there is a getter sibling for reading current settings. The description simply states the action without context.

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