get_transcript_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether an API key is required, whether it makes network calls, side effects, rate limits, or failure modes (e.g., when subtitles are unavailable). The only extra clue is 'ctx: MCP context for logging', but this is minimal.

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 a clear purpose sentence followed by a terse Args list. The only minor issue is that 'ctx' is described but not present in the input schema, which could cause slight confusion about whether to pass it explicitly.

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?

Given the output schema exists, return values don't need explaining. The description covers all input parameters and provides a clear functional summary. It lacks error handling details or alternative tool guidance, but for a simple read-only summarizer, this is sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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%, but the docstring explains every parameter: video_url_or_id as URL or ID, max_length as character limit, and languages as optional codes with default behavior. These explanations add substantial meaning beyond the bare schema types and defaults.

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 begins with 'Get a summary of a YouTube video's transcript', which uses a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_transcript (raw transcript) and search_transcript (search within transcript) by focusing on summarizing.

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 implies usage when a summary is needed rather than raw transcript or search results. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state exclusions, but the purpose is clear enough to guide selection. A more explicit 'use this when...' would push it to 5.

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