Extract the full transcript from any public YouTube video as clean Markdown. Works with standard watch links (youtube.com/watch?v=) and short links (youtu.be/). The video must have captions enabled — including auto-generated captions. Returns the transcript as flowing Markdown paragraphs, not raw caption fragments.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains input constraints (captions must be enabled), output format (flowing Markdown paragraphs, not raw fragments), and link compatibility. It does not cover failure modes or authentication, but it does not contradict any annotations and adds substantial context.
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 concise and front-loaded with the primary purpose. Each of the four sentences adds specific value: purpose, link formats, caption prerequisite, and output style. No unnecessary words or fluff.
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 simple single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description adequately covers input requirements and return format. It could mention what happens when captions are missing, but the prerequisite is clearly stated, and the output schema likely covers the return structure.
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 input schema only defines 'url' as a required string with no description. The tool description adds meaning by explaining the expected URL formats (youtube.com/watch?v= and youtu.be/) and the public/caption requirements, thus enriching the semantics beyond the bare schema.
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 tool's purpose: extract the full transcript from a YouTube video as Markdown. It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishes itself from siblings like convert_url and convert_file by focusing exclusively on YouTube transcripts, and mentions acceptable link formats.
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 clear context on when to use the tool by specifying the video link types (watch and short links) and the caption requirement. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the YouTube-specific scope effectively differentiates it from the generic convert_url and other conversion tools.
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.
Several tools overlap: convert_url already supports ArXiv and YouTube, making convert_arxiv and convert_youtube redundant. convert_with_metadata duplicates convert_file/convert_url but adds a metadata header. Agents must read descriptions carefully to choose correctly.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: convert_*, count_tokens, list_supported_formats, prepare_for_rag. No mixed conventions or vague verbs exist.
9 tools is well-scoped for a document conversion service. Each tool has a distinct role (file, URL, batch, metadata, token counting, format listing, RAG preparation) without being bloated.
The domain of converting sources to Markdown is thoroughly covered: files, URLs, batch conversion, metadata, token counting, and RAG chunking. The only minor redundancy is the specialized source converters, but the core workflow is complete.
