obs-get-input-mute

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states this is a 'get' operation, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't disclose error conditions (e.g., invalid input name), performance characteristics, or what the return value looks like (e.g., boolean mute state). For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and uses straightforward language. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (single parameter, read-only operation) and 100% schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it should ideally explain the return format (e.g., boolean mute state) or error behavior to be fully complete for agent use.

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%, with the single parameter 'inputName' clearly documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does all the work.

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 clearly states the verb ('Gets') and resource ('audio mute state of an input'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from similar 'get' tools like 'obs-get-input-volume' or 'obs-get-input-audio-balance' beyond specifying the mute state attribute.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing input), compare with 'obs-toggle-input-mute' for muting/unmuting, or reference 'obs-get-input-list' to discover available inputs. Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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