obsbot_tail2_snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so richly: it discloses the transport path (SRT/ffmpeg port 5000), the required OBSBOT Center listener mode, exclusivity with NDI, that reboots clear the setting, the streaming-settings-off constraint, the ffmpeg dependency, and — importantly — the graceful degradation when SRT is off. That is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and its purpose, and nearly every clause carries distinct operational information. It is dense and its long fallback parenthetical runs on, but little of it is 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?

For a tool with no output schema and no annotations, this covers invocation prerequisites, failure behavior, dependencies, and parameter ranges well. The un-described 'camera' parameter and the absence of return-format detail (e.g., image encoding) are the remaining 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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it explains resolution (longest edge, 256–1920, default 640) and quality (1–100, default 80) plus the 16:9 1080p source. Only the 'camera' selector is left undefined, which is a minor residual gap.

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+resource ('Grab one still frame from a Tail 2 and return it as an image') and even names the intent (framing/lighting checks, pixel measurement). It does not differentiate from close siblings like obsbot_tail2_capture_photo or obsbot_capture_snapshot, so an agent must infer which snapshot path applies.

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 intent clause ('for framing/lighting checks — and for measuring pixels') implies when to reach for it, and it explains the SRT-off fallback. But there is no explicit comparison against the photo-capture siblings, so the alternative-selection guidance is only implied.

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