Stop Output

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which are consistent with the description. However, the description does not add any behavioral details beyond the annotations, such as what happens if the output is already stopped or if the output name is invalid. It does not mention side effects or error conditions, but given that annotations already cover safety, this is acceptable.

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 fluff. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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?

This is a simple tool with one parameter and good annotations, but the description is sparse. It could benefit from a note clarifying what 'output' means in OBS (e.g., streaming, recording, virtual cam) and that it complements obs-start-output and obs-toggle-output. The lack of output schema reduces the need for return details, but some context on preconditions would help.

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% description coverage for the single parameter (outputName described as 'Output name'). The description 'Stops an output' does not add meaning beyond the schema; it doesn't explain what an 'output' refers to or what valid names look like. However, since the schema fully describes the parameter, the baseline score is 3.

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 'Stops an output' is clear but minimal. It specifies the verb 'stops' and the resource 'output', but it does nothing to distinguish from sibling functions like obs-stop-record, obs-stop-stream, or obs-stop-virtual-cam, which also stop some kind of output.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention that it requires an output name or clarify that it applies to a specific type of output (e.g., streaming, recording, virtual cam). It fails to explain how it relates to obs-toggle-output or obs-start-output.

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