datasets_youtube_creators_item

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the core behavior — returning one channel record — and the source dataset. But it does not mention behavior for missing/invalid IDs, whether the dataset is filtered, or any other edge-case behavior. It is transparent for a simple getter but leaves typical lookup failure semantics unstated.

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 that states the action first, then the precise lookup mechanism. There is no filler; every clause earns its place.

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 tool with one required parameter, no nested objects, and no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it states the action, the record type, the lookup key, and the dataset source. The only notable gap is edge-case behavior (e.g., not-found response), which is minor for a simple item getter but keeps it from a 5.

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% and the schema already explains channel_id with an example. The description adds only the context that this ID comes from the `youtube-creators` dataset, which is useful but not essential. Per the high-coverage baseline, a 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('YouTube creator' / 'channel record'), and a precise lookup key ('by channel id'). It also names the exact dataset enum value (`youtube-creators`), which clearly distinguishes this item-lookup tool from sibling search and facets 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?

The phrase 'Returns one YouTube channel record by channel id' clearly implies this tool is for exact ID lookups, contrasting with the likely multi-result behavior of siblings like datasets_youtube_creators_search. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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