get_playlist_items

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The phrase 'Get all videos' conflicts with the max_results default of 25, and the description does not disclose pagination behavior, authentication needs, or rate limits. This is a meaningful gap for a tool that retrieves data from an external API.

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 with no filler. The action and resource are front-loaded, and the second sentence efficiently lists the expected return contents.

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?

The description names the return fields, which helps compensate for the absence of an output schema. However, it omits how max_results affects pagination and does not clarify that 'all' is not literal without additional requests. Overall it is adequate but incomplete.

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 100%: both url and max_results are already documented in the input schema. The description does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 identifies the action (get) and resource (videos in a YouTube playlist), and it names the output fields (titles, channels, positions). It distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like get_transcript or get_channel_videos through the explicit 'YouTube playlist' scope, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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 intended use is clear: retrieve playlist contents with metadata. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools, but the domain context is strong enough that an agent can select it appropriately among the siblings.

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