obs-set-source-private-settings

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, yet it discloses nothing about what happens to existing settings, whether the change is reversible, whether the source must be active, or what the call returns. For a mutation tool taking an opaque nested settings object, this is a significant disclosure gap.

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 single sentence is free of padding, but it is under-specified rather than efficient: there is no front-loaded caution or scoping detail, and the description ends where useful information would begin.

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?

The tool is a mutation of an opaque, nested settings object with no annotations and no output schema, and the description says nothing about outcome or side effects. An agent could form the call from the schema alone, but not anticipate the consequences.

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%, with each of the four parameters documented in the schema including the overlay default of true, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, such as how sourceName and sourceUuid interact or what keys sourceSettings expects.

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?

"Sets the private settings of a source" states a specific verb (sets) and resource (source private settings), so an agent can identify the operation. However, it does not differentiate this write tool from the closely named sibling obs-get-source-private-settings or from obs-set-scene-item-private-settings, leaving the reader to infer the distinction from the name 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus obs-get-source-private-settings or the scene-item variant, and no mention of prerequisites such as knowing the source name/UUID or having fetched current settings first. The only usage-adjacent hint, the overlay-vs-replace behavior, lives in the schema rather than the description.

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