list_channel_videos

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It reveals reverse chronological ordering, pagination via page_token, the 50-per-page limit, and the returned video fields. It does not mention auth, rate limits, or error behavior, but the read-only 'Lists' framing plus pagination details are meaningful for a list operation.

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 core purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence and the Args/Returns sections are clearly formatted. It is efficient overall, though the Returns list is partly redundant with the existing output schema and Args details duplicate schema property names.

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 low-complexity read tool with only two optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior, pagination, and return contents. The main missing piece is when to select this over sibling tools, but that gap is more about routing than about invoking the tool correctly.

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 properties only provide names, types, and defaults (schema_description_coverage 0%). The description compensates fully by defining max_results as the number of videos to retrieve capped at 50 per page and page_token as the optional pagination token, adding meaning the schema lacks.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Lists your channel's uploaded videos in reverse chronological order.' This clearly identifies the tool's function and differentiates it from sibling analytics/detail tools like get_channel_analytics or get_video_details by focusing on an unfiltered chronological listing.

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?

No guidance explains when to choose this tool over siblings such as get_top_performing_videos or get_video_details. The use case is only implied by the verb 'Lists', and there are no explicit alternatives, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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