search_youtube_content

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries behavioral disclosure. It details response structure, a deferred filter (returns 400), semantic nuance about publishTime filter value vs response field, and pagination fields. This provides rich behavioral transparency.

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 long but each sentence adds valuable information. It is well-structured: purpose, differentiation, response fields, filter fields, and additional notes. Slightly verbose but not wasteful.

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 and 5 parameters, the description thoroughly covers response format, filterable fields, pagination, and credit cost. The tool's complexity is well addressed, leaving no major gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds significant value: lists many filterable fields, notes a deferred filter, clarifies publishTime semantic split, and explains pagination parameters. This goes well beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 searches individual YouTube content (videos, shorts, streams) and explicitly differentiates from sibling 'search_youtube' which searches creators. The verb 'search' and resource 'YouTube content' are specific and unambiguous.

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 explicitly distinguishes from search_youtube ('Different from search_youtube (which searches CREATORS)') and notes that the 4-day fresh-content exclusion does not apply here. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use, the differentiation is strong and covers context.

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