Starts the OBS replay buffer so recent gameplay is captured continuously, letting you save a clip of the last moments on demand.
Starts the replay buffer output
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
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 full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('starts') but doesn't explain what starting the replay buffer entails (e.g., begins recording recent gameplay/video to memory for later saving), potential side effects (e.g., may require specific OBS settings), error conditions, or response format. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's 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?
The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and target, making it easy to parse quickly. Every word earns its place by conveying essential information without redundancy.
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 complexity of starting a replay buffer (a state-changing operation with no annotations or output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on what 'starts' means operationally, success/failure conditions, interactions with other OBS components, or what happens if the buffer is already active. This makes it inadequate for safe and effective use by an agent.
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?
The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter details, which is appropriate here. A baseline of 4 is given since the schema fully covers the absence of parameters, and the description doesn't need to compensate for any gaps.
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 'Starts the replay buffer output' clearly states the action (starts) and target (replay buffer output), which is specific enough to understand the basic function. However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like 'obs-toggle-replay-buffer' or 'obs-save-replay-buffer', leaving some ambiguity about when to use this specific start command versus alternatives.
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 (e.g., whether the replay buffer must be configured first), exclusions (e.g., if it fails when already running), or comparisons to sibling tools like 'obs-toggle-replay-buffer' for toggling or 'obs-stop-replay-buffer' for stopping.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.