ytmcp

get_video_info

Retrieve details for a YouTube video by ID, including title, views, and description. Use it to inspect video metadata before editing or analyzing content.

Instructions

Get detailed information about a video (title, views, description).

Args: video_id: The YouTube video id.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "video_id": "<video_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_video_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`video_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 1, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only lookup and hints at the payload shape, but says nothing about auth requirements, quota/rate limits, what happens for a nonexistent or private video, or error behavior — significant gaps for a YouTube API call.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The core sentence is short and front-loaded, and the single parameter is called out. The 'Args:' block is boilerplate duplication of the schema, a minor but real bit of waste.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

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 described, and for a one-parameter read tool the description covers the essentials. It is thin on failure modes and auth, but nothing critical to invoking it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

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 does so only minimally by restating 'video_id: The YouTube video id,' which adds almost no information beyond the schema's own 'Video Id' title and type.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get detailed information about a video') and enumerates the returned fields (title, views, description), which separates it from mutating siblings like update_video_metadata and delete_video. It does not explicitly name a sibling it must be disambiguated from, so it stops short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance at all. An agent must infer on its own that this is for fetching a single known video id versus search_videos or get_top_videos.

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