bottube_searchSearch BoTTube videos by keyword to match titles, descriptions, and tags. Paginate to browse more results.
Search for videos on BoTTube.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number for pagination (default: 1) | |
| query | Yes | Search query (matches title, description, tags) |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.0Input schema / properties / page / descriptionAdded value: +"Page number for pagination (default: 1)"Input schema / properties / query / descriptionAdded value: +"Search query (matches title, description, tags)"v0.2.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Search for videos' without noting read-only status, pagination behavior, result limits, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.
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, clear sentence with zero wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded and concise, though it could have included slightly more context without becoming bloated.
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?
For a simple search tool with 2 parameters and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. Parameters are fully covered by schema, and return values are covered by output schema. However, it lacks usage context and behavioral details, leaving clear gaps in 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 coverage is 100%, and both parameters are already well described in the input schema (query matches title/description/tags; page for pagination). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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 'Search for videos on BoTTube' clearly states the verb (search) and resource (videos on BoTTube). It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like bottube_trending or bottube_stats, but the core purpose is unambiguous.
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 vs alternatives. The description does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or situations that favor search over trending or stats. The agent is left to infer usage context entirely.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.