Retrieves the available items for a list property on an OBS input, such as displays for a display capture source.
Gets the items of a list property from an input's properties (e.g. display capture available displays)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| inputName | No | Name of the input | |
| inputUuid | No | UUID of the input | |
| propertyName | Yes | Name of the list property to get the items of |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. 'Gets' implies a read, but nothing states whether the call fails when propertyName refers to a non-list property, whether it requires the input to be active, or what the returned items look like. For a parameterized query tool with zero annotation coverage, this is thin.
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 no filler, and the identifying detail (list property items) comes first. The phrasing 'from an input's properties' is slightly redundant with 'property' appearing again, but nothing is wasted.
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?
There is no output schema, so the description should say what the returned items are (strings, name/value objects, ordering). It does not, and it also omits failure behavior for non-list properties, leaving a meaningful gap for a query tool.
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 the schema already documents all three parameters; a baseline of 3 applies. The parenthetical example ('display capture available displays') adds modest value by hinting at valid propertyName values, but inputName vs inputUuid selection semantics remain 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?
States a specific verb ('Gets') and a specific resource ('the items of a list property from an input's properties') with a concrete example of what a list property looks like. An agent can distinguish this from obs-get-input-settings or obs-get-input-list, though the example is the only signal that this covers only list-typed properties.
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 on when to use this versus obs-get-input-settings (which returns the full property bag) or the various obs-get-input-* getters. There are no exclusions or preconditions, so the agent must infer the niche from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.