yt_get_analysis

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It identifies the operation as a retrieval (non-destructive) but fails to disclose caching behavior, error conditions, authentication needs, or what 'full cached analysis JSON' entails beyond a vague label.

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 sentence with zero wasted words, front-loading the purpose and resource. It is optimally concise for the information provided.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain the returned JSON content, error handling, prerequisites (e.g., existing analysis), or any side effects. A retrieval of 'full cached analysis' warrants more completeness.

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% (the single parameter has a clear description referencing yt_list_analyses). The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score 3 is appropriate.

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 'retrieve' and explicitly names the resource 'full cached analysis JSON for a specific channel'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like yt_list_analyses (listing) and yt_analyze_channel (analysis creation).

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 implies usage context via the parameter reference to yt_list_analyses, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

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