youtube analytics query report

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context: dates are inclusive, channel defaults to 'channel==MINE', and results contain column names and rows capped at 1000. It does not cover quotas or error behavior, but the annotation coverage lowers that burden.

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 compact and front-loaded, with useful examples and no filler. Each sentence adds concrete invocation or result-shape information.

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 an eight-parameter query tool with no schema descriptions, the description covers most parameters and the return shape, while annotations cover safety behavior and an output schema exists. The main gap is explicit documentation of max_results and broader quota/error context.

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%, so the description must carry the parameter semantics. It gives examples for metrics and dimensions, explains date format and inclusivity, documents filter syntax, states the channel default, and mentions sort usage for top videos. It does not clearly document the max_results parameter beyond the 1000-row output cap.

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 a specific verb and resource: querying a YouTube Analytics report for the user's channel. It distinguishes itself from generic analytics siblings by naming YouTube Analytics, though it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as analytics_run_report.

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?

Usage guidance is mostly embedded in examples such as 'top videos need sort "-views"' and the filter syntax. However, there is no explicit explanation of when to use this tool versus alternatives, or when not to use it.

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