obs-toggle-record-pauseToggle pause state on an active OBS recording to temporarily halt or resume capturing.
Toggles pause on the record output
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "obs-toggle-record-pause"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the agent knows it's a write operation. The description adds minimal extra behavioral context beyond stating the purpose; it doesn't mention potential side effects, Idempotency, or state dependence, but these are not critical for a simple toggle. No contradiction with 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 with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and directly communicates the purpose without any filler.
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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, clear purpose), the description is complete. Sibling tools provide sufficient context, and the description does not need to elaborate on return values or edge cases.
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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is trivially 100%. According to the rubric, a 0-parameter tool receives a baseline score of 4 for parameter semantics, as there is no need for the description to explain parameters.
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 ('Toggles pause') and the resource ('the record output'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like obs-pause-record and obs-resume-record, which set a specific state rather than toggle. It also contrasts with obs-toggle-record which toggles recording, not pause.
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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like obs-pause-record or obs-resume-record. The toggle nature is implied by the name but not stated, leaving the agent to infer that it is useful when the current pause state is unknown.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.