obsbot_image_wb_auto

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it only states the literal action without any context. It does not disclose that this overrides manual white balance settings, whether the setting persists, whether the camera must be awake/connected, or what happens if the request fails. The description adds no information beyond the tool name's own meaning.

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 four-word single sentence is maximally concise and front-loaded with no wasted words. It is efficient, though it borders on being so minimal that it adds little beyond the machine-readable tool name itself.

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?

The tool is low-complexity (one optional string parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), so the bar is lower. However, the description still omits any explanation of the 'camera' parameter and any preconditions, and with 32 siblings including a direct manual-counterpart tool, a one-line pointer to the manual alternative would meaningfully improve completeness.

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 0% and the single 'camera' parameter is documented only as a string with no meaning. The description does not mention the parameter at all, so the model cannot know whether 'camera' is an index, ID, or name, or how to obtain valid values (presumably from obsbot_devices). The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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?

The description states a specific verb ('Enable') and resource ('auto white balance'), making the intended action immediately clear. It distinguishes implicitly from the sibling obsbot_image_wb_manual through the word 'auto', though it does not explicitly name the alternative or describe what the camera actually does when enabled.

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 guidance is given about when to use this tool versus obsbot_image_wb_manual, obsbot_image_adjust, or obsbot_image_exposure_auto. The only usage signal is the action itself ('Enable auto white balance'), which essentially restates the purpose and offers no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative-selection logic.

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