obsbot_tail2_stream

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 mutual exclusivity ('exactly ONE is active at a time'), the displacement side effect of setting srt, and the reboot-resets-to-off state loss. It omits any auth/permission or error behavior, which keeps it from a 5.

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 dense, front-loaded sentence pairing the read/set duality with the enum, followed by two short clauses on exclusivity and the SRT use case. No filler, though the em-dash chain makes it slightly run-on.

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?

Covers read-vs-set behavior, the full value set, state-transition side effects, and a cross-reference to the snapshot sibling, so an agent needs nothing more for correct invocation. The undocumented 'camera' parameter and unspecified read-return shape are the only 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the state semantics of the 'output' values (mutual exclusivity, reboot reset) — genuine meaning beyond the bare enum — but says nothing about the 'camera' parameter (presumably a target selector), leaving half the 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?

States a precise dual verb ('Read (bare call) or set') on a specific resource ('Tail 2's active network output') and enumerates the accepted values. An agent can distinguish it from every gimbal/image/preset sibling at a glance.

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?

Gives a concrete motivating context ('programmatic way to arm SRT for obsbot_tail2_snapshot without touching OBSBOT Center') and implies the GUI alternative. It does not spell out when a user should prefer NDI/RTSP or when not to change output at all, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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