Starts an OBS Studio live stream and lets you begin broadcasting when your scene and audio setup are ready.
Start streaming in OBS
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| confirm | No | Explicit confirmation required when OBS_PROTECT_DESTRUCTIVE is active |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about side effects, error or no-op behavior when already streaming, whether credentials/settings must exist first, or what a successful start returns. The one hint about the protected-destructive gate lives only in the schema, not the description.
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 front-loaded and free of filler, so nothing needs trimming. However, its brevity is under-specification rather than efficiency: it uses minimal space but also conveys minimal information for a state-changing broadcast action.
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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at least state the side effect and the already-streaming case. As written, an agent knows only the verb and must infer safety, idempotency, and prerequisites from siblings.
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?
There is a single optional parameter with 100% schema description coverage, and the schema already explains that 'confirm' is required under OBS_PROTECT_DESTRUCTIVE. The description adds nothing beyond that, so the baseline of 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?
States a specific verb and resource ("Start streaming") that an agent can map directly to an OBS action. It does not, however, distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as obs-toggle-stream or the generic obs-start-output, which a reader must resolve by 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?
No when-to-use guidance is given: nothing says to prefer this over obs-toggle-stream, nothing says whether it is idempotent or errors when a stream is already live, and nothing mentions prerequisites like configured stream service settings. The agent must guess the selection rule from the sibling names.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.