Enable or disable autoplay mode on a TriCaster DDR media player so clips play automatically when cued. Specify DDR 1 or 2 and set true or false.
Enable or disable autoplay mode on a DDR (media player).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ddr | Yes | DDR number (1 or 2) | |
| enabled | Yes | True to enable autoplay, False to disable |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether the setting persists, whether it interrupts current playback, whether it requires the DDR to be idle, or what happens on failure.
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?
A single tight sentence with the action front-loaded and the DDR parenthetical earning its place by decoding the acronym. No padding, though there is little to structure.
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 two-parameter toggle with no output schema the description is minimally adequate, but with no annotations it should at least note persistence or interaction with playback siblings. The essential call mechanics are covered by the schema, leaving only behavioral context missing.
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 100%: both 'ddr' (enum 1 or 2) and 'enabled' (boolean) are documented in the schema. The description adds no format or meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 (enable/disable) and resource (autoplay mode on a DDR), and clarifies the DDR acronym as a media player. However, it does nothing to distinguish this from siblings like ddr_play, ddr_stop, or ddr_set_loop, so an agent must infer the boundary itself.
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 when-to-use guidance is given beyond the obvious toggle semantics. It never explains how this relates to ddr_play/ddr_stop (does enabling autoplay start playback?) or when an agent would prefer this over those siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.