songrequests_get_settingsRetrieve a StreamElements channel's song request settings to review limits, point costs, moderation rules, and allowed sources.
Get the channel's media (song) request settings: limits, costs, moderation and allowed sources.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| channel | No | StreamElements channel id (24-char hex). Defaults to SE_CHANNEL_ID or the channel that owns the token. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so no safety credit is needed. The description adds the list of setting categories returned, but says nothing about required permission scope (admin vs moderator) or whether the channel defaults apply, which matters for an authenticated GET.
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?
One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and the rest is a compact enumeration of returned fields. No 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?
With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned categories so the agent knows what it gets back. The one meaningful gap is the unresolved overlap with songrequests_get_public_settings, which the description should have addressed.
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% and the single channel parameter is fully documented there, including the SE_CHANNEL_ID/owning-token default. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 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?
Clear verb+resource ("Get the channel's media (song) request settings") with the content of the payload enumerated: limits, costs, moderation, allowed sources. However it never distinguishes itself from the sibling songrequests_get_public_settings, which an agent must choose between.
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 or when-not-to-use guidance. The existence of songrequests_get_public_settings makes the choice between the two non-obvious, and the description offers no routing hint (e.g., authenticated vs public scope).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.