SiteCheck Shop & Social

Latest videos of a YouTube channel: video id, title, link

social_youtube

Read-only

Latest videos of a YouTube channel (first page, up to 30): video id, title, link, duration, view count text and age text, read from the channel's public Videos page. No comments, no subscriber counts and no full history; YouTube's page layout can change. Takes about 13 s; allow a 30 s timeout. Related tools on this server, for a different need: social_pinterest when you need latest pins of a public Pinterest profile from Pinterest's; social_socialblade when you need Social Blade creator statistics for a YouTube, Instagram. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "handle": "<handle>"
    },
    "name": "social_youtube"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`handle`	Yes	Channel handle, with or without @ (e.g. @YouTube). 3-30 letters, digits, . _ -

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`source`	No
`videos`	No
`channel`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`videoCount`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only and open-world behavior, but the description adds substantial operational context: the public Videos page source, first-page/30-video limit, absence of full history, possible page-layout changes, roughly 13 seconds runtime, a 30-second timeout recommendation, and pricing/charging behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, scope, and returned fields, then adds limitations, latency, alternatives, and pricing. It is somewhat dense and has awkward phrasing in the related-tools sentence, but most content earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description need not explain return values in detail, yet it still lists key fields. It covers scope limits, source, volatility, latency, timeout guidance, and billing behavior, leaving little an agent needs to infer before calling.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the handle parameter already documents accepted formats, examples, and character constraints. The description adds no further parameter-specific semantics beyond saying the handle refers to a YouTube channel.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific verb and resource: fetching the latest videos of a YouTube channel, with explicit scope (first page, up to 30) and returned fields (video id, title, link, duration, view count text, age text). It also distinguishes itself by ruling out comments, subscriber counts, and full history.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description clearly routes two adjacent needs elsewhere: social_pinterest for latest pins and social_socialblade for creator statistics. It also says what this tool does not provide, but it does not explicitly distinguish against several obvious YouTube siblings such as comments, transcript, or channel search.

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

All SiteCheck Shop & Social tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?