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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds the pagination behavior ('use cursor when paginated') and the fact that it returns a list, which is useful for an agent deciding how to handle large result sets. 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 short sentences with no extraneous detail. The core purpose is stated first, followed by key usage notes. Every clause earns its place; nothing is redundant.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, input methods, and pagination. It does not describe the shape of each list item, but that is not required given the tool name and missing output schema. The essentials for calling the tool correctly are present.

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%, so each parameter is documented. The description adds semantic value by explaining that channelId and handle are alternative identifiers (implying at least one is needed) and by clarifying cursor's role in pagination. This helps agents understand parameter relationships beyond the raw 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 it lists Shorts from a specific YouTube channel, explicitly contrasting with 'long-form videos'. It also says it accepts a channel id or handle, which distinguishes it from channel-wide video listers like youtube_channel_videos_list and from trending Shorts tools like youtube_shorts_trending_list.

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?

It provides clear context by scoping to Shorts only ('not long-form videos') and notes the two ways to specify a channel (id or handle). It also mentions using a cursor for pagination. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives or stating 'when not to use', but the exclusion of long-form videos is an implicit routing hint.

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