Stops an active OBS live stream through the OBS WebSocket protocol, ending broadcast output when you need to halt streaming.
Stop 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 burden and discloses almost nothing: it does not confirm this is a mutating, effectively irreversible live-broadcast action, nor does it mention the confirm guard, permission requirements, or the error behavior when no stream is active. Only the bare fact of stopping is conveyed.
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 phrase with zero waste, and the action verb comes first. It is arguably too terse rather than too long, but nothing in it is filler.
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 live-broadcast control operation with no annotations and no output schema, the agent needs to know the preconditions (stream must be active), the effect, and the side effects of the confirm flag. None of that is present, leaving the definition incomplete for the tool's risk level.
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 single parameter has 100% schema description coverage explaining the 'confirm' flag and its OBS_PROTECT_DESTRUCTIVE dependency, so the schema does the work. The description adds no meaning beyond it, which is the expected baseline when coverage is complete.
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 ('Stop streaming') with an explicit product scope ('in OBS'), so the agent knows exactly what action is performed. It does not differentiate from closely related siblings such as obs-stop-output or obs-toggle-stream, which is what separates a 4 from a 5.
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 call this versus obs-toggle-stream (which also ends a stream) or obs-stop-output. Nothing tells the agent whether the stream must currently be live, or what to do if it isn't.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.