dsk_on

Does 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 disclose the key behavioral outcome — the layer becomes live/on air — but is silent on whether the cut is instant vs. transitioned (the distinction that separates it from dsk_auto), reversibility, or required state/permissions.

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 sentence, no filler, and the action and its effect are front-loaded. Nothing to trim.

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 one-parameter, no-output-schema tool this is largely sufficient: the resource, the effect, and the enum constraint are all covered. The only gap is the transition/instant behavior that would complete the picture relative to dsk_auto.

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 100% and the single enum parameter is fully documented in the schema itself ('DSK number (1 or 2)'). The description adds nothing parameter-specific, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('bring ... on air') and resource (DSK layer), and even expands the acronym so an agent unfamiliar with broadcast jargon understands it. It doesn't explicitly contrast with the dsk_off/dsk_auto siblings, but the intent is unmistakable.

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?

Usage is only implied by the name and the phrase 'on air' — the agent can infer this is the tool to key a layer live, but nothing states when to pick this over dsk_auto (auto transition) or dsk_off, nor any prerequisite such as a source being assigned to the keyer.

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