obsbot_tail2_record

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does meaningful work: it discloses a hidden failure mode (state reads 'off' even with no SD card, but starting will not succeed) and the storage dependency. It does not cover auth/permissions or response shape, so it stops short of full transparency.

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 sentences, zero filler, and the operational mode is front-loaded before the storage caveat. Every clause adds actionable information.

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?

No output schema and no annotations, so the description needs to be self-sufficient. It covers the recording precondition well but leaves the 'camera' parameter and the returned state shape undefined, which an agent would need in order to call this correctly.

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% for both parameters, so the description must compensate. It does explain 'enable' semantics well via the read/control duality, but the 'camera' parameter is never mentioned, leaving one of two parameters undocumented.

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 names a concrete verb pair (read/control) and resource (the Tail 2's recording switch), and the dual-mode framing is clear: bare call reads, enabling writes. It does not explicitly differentiate from the similarly-named siblings obsbot_capture_record / obsbot_capture_stop, which would have pushed it to 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?

It tells the agent exactly when each mode applies (bare call for read, 'enable' for control) and adds a prerequisite workflow: check obsbot_tail2_status's sdcard field before attempting to start. No explicit naming of alternative tools, but the usage condition is concrete.

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