YouTube Transcripts API

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

With no annotations, the description carries full disclosure burden. It mentions the timestamps feature, but does not disclose important behavioral details such as whether the operation is read-only, what happens if no transcript is available, or any format requirements. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to anticipate behavior.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it immediately understandable.

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 the tool's simplicity, the description is mostly complete: it states the output (transcript) and a key feature (timestamps). However, with no output schema, a bit more detail on the response structure or potential errors would make it more complete. Still, it is adequate for basic usage.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, such as the format for video IDs or the purpose of country/language codes.

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 the tool's function: 'Get the transcript (with timestamps) for a YouTube video.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies a distinct resource (transcripts), which differentiates it from sibling tools like youtube_search or youtube_video.

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 implies usage (when you need a transcript), but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives. There is no mention of exclusions or alternative tools, though the context of sibling tools makes the purpose fairly obvious.

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