Retrieves the index position of a scene item within a scene, where 0 indicates the bottom of the source list.
Gets the index position of a scene item in a scene (0 is bottom of the source list)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sceneName | No | Name of the scene the item is in | |
| sceneUuid | No | UUID of the scene the item is in | |
| sceneItemId | Yes | Numeric ID of the scene item |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the zero-based index base and 'Gets' implies a read-only operation, but it omits error behavior, scene-context requirements, and return details beyond the index concept.
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 short sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. The parenthetical detail is useful and not redundant.
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 simple read tool with fully described parameters, the definition covers the core purpose and index interpretation. The main gap is that it does not clarify how the optional sceneName and sceneUuid are expected to be used together or omitted.
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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents sceneName, sceneUuid, and sceneItemId. The description adds the index origin, which aids interpretation of the result, but does not clarify parameter relationships such as when to use sceneName versus sceneUuid.
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 ('Gets') and resource ('index position of a scene item in a scene') and clarifies zero-based ordering. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools such as obs-set-scene-item-index or obs-get-scene-items, so it is clear but lacks named sibling differentiation.
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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance. The read-only intent is implied by 'Gets', but an agent must infer when to choose this over obs-get-scene-items or obs-get-scene-item-id.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.