metube_upload_cookies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Upload cookies' but does not mention side effects (e.g., whether it overwrites existing cookies), authorization requirements, or whether the operation is reversible. The description lacks details on the tool's behavior beyond the basic action.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, with the key information front-loaded. Every word serves a purpose, zero fluff. The clear structure with a brief explanation and parameter description makes it efficient for an agent to parse.

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 (one required parameter, an output schema exists), the description is adequate but not complete. It covers the parameter meaning but lacks context on expected outcomes, error conditions, or typical usage scenarios. The presence of an output schema slightly reduces the need to describe return values, but the description still feels sparse.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by specifying 'Cookie file content in Netscape format', which clarifies the expected format. However, for a single parameter, this is minimally helpful and does not explain acceptable values or constraints beyond format.

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 verb 'Upload' and the resource 'cookies for authenticated downloads'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like metube_delete_cookies and metube_cookie_status by specifying the purpose of enabling authenticated downloads. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other upload or configuration tools.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not explain when to upload cookies versus using metube_cookie_status or metube_delete_cookies. It also does not mention prerequisites, such as having Netscape-formatted cookies available.

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