Discover YouTube videos by topic/keyword across all of YouTube. Use when the user wants to learn from a talk/interview/lecture and has no URL — especially when search_podcasts / search_episodes find nothing (much long-form content is YouTube-first). NO COST: pure discovery. Returns rows with a ready-to-transcribe url; to ingest one, confirm cost and call transcribe_url(url, title).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| max | No | ||
| query | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by disclosing that 'Returns rows with a ready-to-transcribe url' and instructs to 'confirm cost and call transcribe_url(url, title)' for ingestion. No contradictions.
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?
Three sentences front-load purpose and usage, provide output details, and next steps. No unnecessary words.
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?
Covers the core use case, output schema, and next action. Missing parameter details for 'max' but overall adequate for a simple search tool with no output schema.
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 0%, and the description does not explain the 'max' parameter or add details beyond the schema. It only implies 'query' via 'by topic/keyword,' but fails to clarify the optional integer parameter.
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 'Discover YouTube videos by topic/keyword across all of YouTube,' specifying the action and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like search_podcasts and search_episodes by mentioning YouTube-first content.
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?
Explicitly tells when to use: 'when the user wants to learn from a talk/interview/lecture and has no URL — especially when search_podcasts / search_episodes find nothing.' Also notes 'NO COST: pure discovery.'
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Tools are largely distinct, covering separate actions (search, get, list, generate, transcribe, save). The main potential confusion is between list_episodes and list_feed_episodes, but descriptions clearly separate local from external.
All tools follow consistent verb_noun snake_case patterns (get_, list_, search_, generate_, transcribe_, save/remove), with no mixed conventions or unexpected styles.
25 tools is at the high end for a server of this scope. The broad domain justifies many functions, but the count feels heavy and some tools could be consolidated without losing clarity.
Discovery, ingestion, transcription, lesson generation, and user account management are all well covered. Minor gaps exist, such as no way to delete or update lessons beyond save/remove.