reachy_start_webrtc_stream

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that streaming starts, the sources involved, and that a URL is returned. However, it does not mention that the stream continues until explicitly stopped, nor any side effects like replacing an existing stream or resource usage, which would be relevant for a stateful start operation.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and result. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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 zero-parameter tool, the description adequately covers the invocation and return value (the stream URL). It omits lifecycle guidance such as how to stop the stream or verify it is running, but sibling names provide some of that context.

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 is empty, so there are no parameters to document; per baseline a 0-parameter tool rates 4. The description adds relevant context about which sources are streamed, but no parameter-specific explanation is needed.

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 ('Start') and resource ('WebRTC video/audio streaming from the robot's camera and microphone'), and explicitly says it returns the stream URL. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like reachy_stop_webrtc_stream and reachy_capture_image.

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?

The description implies usage when the agent wants to begin streaming, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives or on prerequisites such as camera/microphone readiness. There are no exclusions or references to related tools like reachy_stop_webrtc_stream for cleanup, so usage context is only implicit.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.