codivupload-mcp

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 but fails completely. 'Stop Broadcast' doesn't indicate whether this is a destructive operation, what permissions are required, whether the action is reversible, what happens to associated content, or what the response looks like. For a tool that appears to control YouTube broadcasts, this lack of behavioral information is particularly problematic.

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?

While technically concise with just two words, this represents under-specification rather than effective brevity. The description fails to provide necessary information that would help an agent understand and use the tool correctly. Every sentence should earn its place, but here the minimal description doesn't earn its place by providing adequate guidance.

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 that this is a mutation tool (stopping/deleting broadcasts) with no annotations, no output schema, and a description that provides minimal context, the description is completely inadequate. The agent needs to understand the consequences of using this tool, what permissions are required, what happens to the broadcast content, and what to expect as a result - none of which is addressed.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage, with both parameters ('id' and 'delete_broadcast') clearly documented in the schema itself. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's already in the structured schema. According to scoring rules, when schema_description_coverage is high (>80%), the baseline score is 3 even with no parameter information in the description.

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 'Stop Broadcast' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name without adding meaningful context. While it indicates the action (stop) and resource (broadcast), it lacks specificity about what 'stop' means operationally and doesn't distinguish this tool from potential alternatives. The description fails to clarify whether this stops a live stream, ends a scheduled broadcast, or performs another type of termination.

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 absolutely no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites, timing considerations, or what distinguishes this from other broadcast-related tools like 'listyoutubebroadcasts' or 'createyoutubebroadcast'. The agent receives no help in determining appropriate use cases for this specific stop operation.

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