obs-set-input-audio-tracks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says it sets track enable state but does not disclose whether the track map replaces all track states, what happens to unspecified tracks, permissions or connection requirements, or error behavior.

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 or redundancy. It states the operation immediately.

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 setter with complete schema coverage and no output schema, the description plus schema is mostly sufficient. However, it does not clarify how to identify the input when both inputName and inputUuid are optional in the schema, nor does it describe mutation side effects.

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 inputName, inputUuid, and the nested inputAudioTracks boolean map. The description adds only general context ('audio tracks of an input') and no parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Sets') and resource ('enable state of audio tracks of an input'), which distinguishes it from the getter sibling obs-get-input-audio-tracks. It does not explicitly name siblings or scope limits, so it is clear but not maximally differentiated.

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?

It gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives; the only cue is that this is the setter counterpart to the getter. An agent must infer that it should be used when changing track enablement rather than reading it.

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