yt_list_analyses

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns specific fields (channel names, video counts, analysis dates) but does not explicitly state that it is read-only or that it has no side effects. The description is adequate but minimal.

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 no unnecessary words. It is direct and every word serves a purpose: stating the action, the resource, and the return values.

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 simplicity of the tool (no parameters, no output schema), the description provides the basic purpose and return fields. However, it could be more complete by noting that it is a read-only operation or mentioning caching behavior. Without annotations, the agent might need more context.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema coverage is vacuously 100%. The description adds context by stating what the tool returns, which is beneficial beyond the empty schema. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description meets it.

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 tool's purpose: listing all cached channel analyses. It specifies the verb 'List' and the resource 'cached channel analyses', distinguishing it from sibling tools like yt_analyze_channel (creates analyses) and yt_get_analysis (retrieves a specific one).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any prerequisites, context, or reasons for choosing it over siblings like yt_analyze_channel or yt_get_analysis.

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