delete_video

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral load. It does disclose the most important trait — the deletion is permanent/irreversible — which is genuinely useful. It omits permission requirements, whether only owned videos can be deleted, and what collateral effects occur (comments, analytics, playlist membership).

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 operative sentence is front-loaded and free of filler, which is exactly right for a one-parameter tool. The docstring-style 'Args:' block is slightly boilerplate but does carry the only parameter documentation available.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, for an irreversible destructive operation with no annotations and zero schema-level parameter documentation, the definition should at least state auth/permission expectations and that the action cannot be undone beyond the single word 'Permanently.'

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It identifies video_id as 'the YouTube video id to delete,' which confirms the identifier domain and purpose, but adds no format, length, or example detail beyond the parameter name.

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?

Names a specific verb (delete) and resource (video) with the scope qualifier 'from the channel,' which clearly separates it from non-destructive siblings like get_video_info or update_video_metadata. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish itself from remove_video_from_playlist, which an agent might confuse with video deletion.

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 states what the tool does but gives no when-to-use context, no prerequisites, and no alternatives. An agent gets no help deciding between this and set_video_visibility or the playlist-removal siblings.

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