obs-stop-output

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Stops an output' implies a state-changing action, but it doesn't specify whether this requires permissions, what happens to the output (e.g., if it's paused or terminated), or any side effects like error handling. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence, 'Stops an output,' which is front-loaded and wastes no words. While it lacks detail, it efficiently communicates the core action without redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a vague purpose, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'output' means in the OBS ecosystem, how stopping affects system state, or what the expected outcome is. Given the complexity implied by numerous sibling tools, more context is needed to guide proper usage.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'outputName' documented as 'Output name' in the schema. The description adds no additional semantic context about this parameter, such as what constitutes a valid output name or how to obtain it. Given the high schema coverage, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the schema handles the parameter documentation adequately.

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 'Stops an output' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name 'obs-stop-output' without adding specificity. It doesn't clarify what an 'output' refers to in the OBS context (e.g., streaming, recording, virtual camera) or what stopping entails. While the verb 'stops' is clear, the resource 'output' remains vague without distinguishing it from similar tools like obs-stop-stream or obs-stop-record.

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-stop-stream, obs-stop-record, obs-stop-replay-buffer, and obs-stop-virtual-cam, the description doesn't indicate which specific output type this tool targets or under what conditions it should be invoked. This lack of differentiation leaves usage ambiguous.

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