vmix_native_setup_guide

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context by explicitly warning that the tool produces setup steps only and does not modify vMix, which clarifies the unsupported, non-applied nature of the output.

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 two concise sentences with the core purpose front-loaded. The read-only warning follows immediately and every sentence adds necessary information without waste.

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 tool has a complex input schema with 7 parameters and multiple action variants, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage. The description is a high-level summary and does not explain what the generated setup steps look like, how they should be used, or how to choose among the many possible actions. It is not complete enough for confident invocation.

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 needed to compensate. It only hints at the 'kind' parameter via 'trigger or non-GT Stinger' and says nothing about 'input,' 'actions,' 'slot,' 'event,' 'duration_ms,' or 'cut_point_ms.' An agent still lacks semantic guidance for most 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Produce concrete native vMix setup steps' for 'a trigger or non-GT Stinger.' This is clear about the tool's purpose, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling tools like vmix_transition_configure or vmix_trigger_save.

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 clear context by stating this tool is read-only and that 'these unsupported settings are NOT written into vMix.' This implies when to use it versus actually applying vMix changes, though it does not name specific alternative tools.

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