obs-set-video-settings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. 'Sets' implies a mutation, but it doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether changes are immediate, require specific permissions, affect ongoing streams/recordings, or have validation constraints. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant 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 description is a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, though it could benefit from more detail given the tool's complexity.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, mutation operation) and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'current video settings' entail, how changes propagate, or what happens on success/failure. For a setter tool in OBS, this leaves critical gaps.

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 all 6 parameters well-documented in the schema (e.g., fpsNumerator, baseWidth). The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the generic 'video settings', so it doesn't enhance semantics. Baseline is 3 when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Sets the current video settings' clearly states the action (sets) and target (video settings), but it's vague about what specific settings are involved. It doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'obs-set-current-scene' or 'obs-set-stream-service-settings' beyond the 'video' qualifier.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, timing considerations, or sibling tools like 'obs-get-video-settings' for retrieval. It's a basic statement with no usage context.

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