youtube_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the supported filter axes and the shape of the returned metadata, including the note about whether results are personalized.

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?

Three tight sentences: what it searches, what filters exist, and what it returns. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and wastes no words, though the filter enumeration slightly overlaps the schema.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully summarizes the return payload (title, channel, views, duration, personalization). Combined with annotations covering the safety profile and a 100%-covered input schema, an agent has enough to invoke it 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and all six parameters (including the enum values and defaults) are fully documented in the schema. The description's mention of upload date, duration, and sorting merely restates what the schema already encodes, so it adds no meaning beyond it — baseline 3.

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 names a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('YouTube') and enumerates what is searchable (videos, channels, playlists), which is clear enough for an agent. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like youtube_get_playlist or youtube_get_channel_info that also touch channels and playlists.

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 explains what the tool does but never says when to reach for it versus the many get_* siblings (youtube_get_video_info, youtube_get_channel_videos, etc.). There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-routing guidance.

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