obs-get-input-deinterlace-mode

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one genuinely behavioral fact — the async-only precondition — and the verb "Gets" implies a read, but it says nothing about failure behavior for non-async inputs, how inputName and inputUuid are resolved against each other, or what the returned mode looks like.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the scope caveat parenthesized at the end; every word earns its place and nothing is padded.

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?

For a two-parameter read tool this is close to adequate, but with no output schema the description should at least characterize the return value (the set of possible deinterlace modes) rather than leaving the agent to discover it. The identifying-parameter ambiguity of two optional keys is likewise unaddressed.

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 both parameters are documented in structured data and the baseline is 3. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema — notably it does not explain why both inputName and inputUuid are present and optional, nor which takes precedence when both are given.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (gets the deinterlace mode of an input) plus a hard scope restriction. It does not distinguish itself from the close siblings obs-get-input-deinterlace-field-order or obs-get-input-deinterlace-mode's setter counterpart, so an agent must infer the boundary from the names alone.

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?

"restricted to async inputs only" is an explicit when-not condition that prevents misuse on non-async sources. However, it never names the alternatives (field-order getter, setter) or says when to check deinterlace mode versus those, leaving routing to inference.

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