channel_home

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 helpfully mentions quota cost (1 unit) and implies additional costs for certain parameters, which is valuable operational context. However, it doesn't describe what 'Home Tab Listings' actually contains, whether results are paginated, or what authentication might be required.

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 extremely concise - a single sentence that communicates the core purpose and includes important operational information (quota cost). Every word earns its place with zero wasted text, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 operation with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description provides basic purpose and quota information but lacks details about what 'Home Tab Listings' actually returns, how pagination works (despite token parameters), or how this differs from similar tools. With no annotations and no output schema, more context would be helpful for proper tool selection and usage.

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 the schema already documents all 8 parameters thoroughly. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, but doesn't need to since the schema coverage is complete. The baseline score of 3 reflects adequate but minimal value addition.

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 with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Channel's Home Tab Listings'), making it immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from its many siblings (like home_feed or channel_videos), which would require explicit comparison to achieve a perfect score.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With 30+ sibling tools including home_feed and various channel-specific tools, the agent receives no help in selecting this specific tool for retrieving home tab listings over other options.

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