Get YouTube Channel

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the disclosure burden. It conveys that the operation is public and normalized, and it documents two accepted URL formats. It does not cover error behavior, return structure, or rate limits, but for a simple read-only tool the disclosed traits are valuable and accurate.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the action, resource, and URL format details. Every clause adds value with no filler or redundancy.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides enough to select and invoke it for a public channel metadata lookup. It does not enumerate exactly which metadata fields are returned or describe failure modes, but the core purpose and input requirements are clear.

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 0%, so the description compensates by explaining the 'url' parameter must be a YouTube channel URL and explicitly lists '/channel/...' or '/@handle' formats. This adds meaning beyond the bare 'uri' format in the schema, though it could include a concrete example.

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 ('Gets') and resource ('normalized public metadata for a YouTube channel URL'), and it names the accepted URL forms ('/channel/CHANNEL_ID' or '/@handle'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like youtube_get_authenticated_channel and youtube_get_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 clearly implies use for public channel URL lookups by specifying 'public metadata' and the URL patterns. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool, so it stops short of providing comprehensive usage guidance.

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