obs-get-output-settings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only operation ('Gets'), but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it requires specific permissions, what format the settings are returned in, or if there are rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'settings' include, the return format, or error conditions. Given the complexity implied by sibling tools (e.g., 'obs-set-output-settings' for mutation), more context is needed for effective 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 'outputName' documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any meaning beyond this, such as examples of output names or constraints. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the baseline score 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?

The description clearly states the verb ('Gets') and resource ('settings of an output'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'obs-get-output-list' or 'obs-get-output-status', which also retrieve output-related information but for different aspects.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'obs-get-output-list' (lists outputs) and 'obs-get-output-status' (gets status), the description lacks context for choosing this specific 'settings' retrieval tool over others.

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