Expand a niche from a seed channel

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It discloses the algorithmic approach (via featured channels, ranking outliers) and practical cost ('Costs about 5 quota units per channel found'), which goes beyond the bare minimum. However, it does not mention potential failure modes or determinism, so it is not exhaustive.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action, then usage guidance and cost. Every word earns its place with zero 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?

The tool has 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description explains purpose and usage well but leaves 'limit' and 'max_channels' undefined and does not describe the return format beyond 'rank the strongest outliers'. This is a significant gap for an agent to invoke the tool correctly without guessing.

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 coverage is only 33% (only 'seed' is described in the schema). The description adds no meaning for 'limit' or 'max_channels', and even for 'seed' it merely restates the schema. The cost note hints at a connection to max_channels but does not clarify the parameter's role.

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+resource: 'Find channels related to a seed channel through the channels it features, then rank the strongest outliers across all of them.' It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on discovery of unknown niches rather than analysis of named channels.

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?

Explicit when-to-use guidance is present: 'Call this when the user wants to discover channels in a niche they do not already know, rather than analyse ones they named.' This states a clear context and contrasts with the alternative use case, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools.

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