obs-set-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 disclosure burden. It does disclose one meaningful behavioral constraint — that only async inputs are accepted — but says nothing about what happens on a non-async input (error vs no-op), whether the change persists or is reversible, or what the call returns.

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 qualifier in parentheses — nothing wasted. It is arguably too terse for a mutation tool, but that is a completeness issue rather than a structural one.

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 3-parameter mutation with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose and the key constraint. It stops short of the error behavior and identifier-resolution guidance an agent would need to call it confidently, but the gaps are moderate rather than severe.

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%: inputName, inputUuid and deinterlaceMode are all documented, including the full enum of mode constants. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema; the async-input restriction is the only extra signal and it applies indirectly to the identifier parameters. Baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb (Sets) and resource (deinterlace mode of an input), which is unambiguous against siblings like obs-get-input-deinterlace-mode or obs-set-input-deinterlace-field-order. It does not explicitly name those siblings, but the mode-vs-field-order distinction is carried by the tool name itself.

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 parenthetical '(restricted to async inputs only)' is a real precondition that narrows when this tool is valid, which is more than most siblings offer. However, it gives no guidance on what to do for non-async inputs, no mention of obs-get-input-deinterlace-mode as the read counterpart, and no prerequisites for resolving inputName vs inputUuid.

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