yt-analysis-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing key behavioral traits: it uses AI for analysis, identifies important moments, returns timestamps (not frames), and operates in preview mode. It doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, or error handling, but covers the core functionality adequately.

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 perfectly concise with two sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose and usage context. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 moderate complexity (AI analysis of video content), no annotations, and no output schema, the description does well by explaining the preview nature and output format (timestamps). It could benefit from mentioning the return structure or error cases, but it's largely complete for guiding agent usage.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents all three parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, maintaining the baseline score of 3 for adequate coverage through structured data alone.

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 specific action ('identify important moments'), resource ('YouTube video'), and output ('return their timestamps'), while explicitly distinguishing it from sibling tools by stating it works 'WITHOUT extracting frames' and is for 'preview mode' before committing to extraction tools like extract_frames or extract_screenshots.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('preview mode... before committing to extraction') and when not to use it ('WITHOUT extracting frames'), with clear alternatives implied through sibling tools like extract_frames and extract_screenshots for actual extraction.

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