Import a file already visible to vMix or create a colour input, returning the discovered GUID. Stage assets first when copying bytes; does not take input on air.
Import a file already visible to vMix, or create a colour input. Returns discovered GUID. Use asset_stage first when bytes need copying. Does not take the input on air.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | ||
| type | Yes | ||
| value | Yes | ||
| dry_run | No | ||
| request_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses key behaviors beyond annotations: returns a GUID, does not take input on air, and references existing files rather than copying bytes. Annotations only indicate write/destructive nature; the description adds context about side effects and return value.
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?
Three concise sentences: purpose, usage guidance, and side-effect caveat. Front-loaded with the main action, no 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?
Covers purpose, return value, and a key usage rule, but lacks parameter-level explanations given zero schema descriptions. Also does not mention error conditions or the dry_run flag. Adequate for a simple tool but incomplete for full comprehension.
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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It only hints at 'type' for input types and 'value' for content, but does not explain name, request_id, or dry_run. The schema provides no descriptions, leaving parameters largely unexplained.
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: import an existing file or create a colour input, and returns a GUID. It differentiates from asset_stage by explicitly stating when to use that tool, and notes it does not put input on air, giving a distinct purpose.
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?
Explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool versus asset_stage: 'Use asset_stage first when bytes need copying.' It also implies when to use this (when the file is already visible to vMix), providing clear routing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.