songrequests_queueFetch the media request queue for a StreamElements channel, including full video details, so you can review and manage viewer song requests.
Get the media request queue with full video details.
| 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 the safety profile is covered. The description adds a small amount of context by advertising 'full video details' (implying a richer payload than a public/limited view), but says nothing about ordering, auth requirements, or queue scope.
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 short sentence, zero filler, purpose front-loaded in the first three words. Nothing to trim.
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 simple read-only list tool with a fully documented single parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient but doesn't clarify what the queue contains (pending vs currently playing, ordering) or how it differs from queue_public. Adequate with clear 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%, and the single optional channel parameter is fully documented in the schema including its SE_CHANNEL_ID default. The description adds nothing beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the 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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Get the media request queue') and hints at scope with 'full video details'. However, it does not differentiate from the near-identical sibling songrequests_queue_public, so an agent must guess which queue view it wants.
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, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as songrequests_queue_public or songrequests_pending. The agent gets no routing help among the many songrequests_* siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.