get_youtube_content_detail

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

With no annotations, the description fully handles disclosure. It reveals credit cost (3 credits), the 4-day exclusion from metric calculations, and lists return fields. No contradictions, but missing details like authentication requirements or rate limits.

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 two sentences, each carrying essential information. No redundancy or filler; efficient and front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description adequately outlines return fields (views, likes, etc.) and mentions credit cost. Minor gap: does not specify if pagination applies or what 'recent' means in terms of time range.

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 input schema covers the single parameter (channelId) fully with a clear description. The tool description adds no further parameter meaning beyond 'recent content' context. With 100% schema coverage, baseline score 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 clearly states it retrieves a YouTube creator's recent content (videos and shorts) with per-item engagement metrics like views, likes, comments, length, etc. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_youtube_performance (aggregate) and search_youtube_content (cross-creator search).

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 explains what it returns but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions filtering options and metric exclusions but lacks direct comparison to sibling tools.

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