Youtube.Video.Update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It says 'guarded' and 'no media upload', but does not explain what 'guarded' means, whether confirmation is required, what permissions are needed, whether changes are reversible, or what happens to unspecified metadata fields.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording, and it leads with the core action. It is perhaps too terse for a mutation tool with undocumented parameters, but it is structurally efficient and easy to scan.

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 existence of an output schema means return values need less explanation, but this is still a mutation tool with no annotations and 0% schema parameter descriptions. It omits key details about confirmation, allowed fields, and update semantics, leaving the definition materially incomplete for safe invocation.

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 compensate, but it does not map to the three parameters. It hints that 'fields' relates to title/description/tags, but does not explain the nested fields object, and it does not mention video_id or the confirm parameter at all.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: update video metadata, with examples title/description/tags. It also draws a clear scope boundary by stating that no media upload occurs, so an agent can distinguish it from playback or upload-related tools.

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 implies the tool is for metadata changes and explicitly excludes media upload, which is useful. However, it does not say when to choose this over sibling read tools such as youtube.videos.list, nor does it describe prerequisites or conditions for use.

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