ytptube_inspect_url

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, which strongly covers safety. The description adds 'without adding it to the download queue' but this is largely redundant with readOnlyHint. It doesn't disclose additional behaviors like rate limits, return format, or special cases.

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 front-loaded with the key action and constraint. Every word earns its place, and it is not padded with fluff. It is concise without being under-specified for its core purpose.

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?

With four parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse to be contextually complete. It explains the core action but does not clarify parameter semantics, what metadata is returned, or any caveats about force/preset/entries. While annotations cover safety, the lack of param and output details leaves gaps.

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 description provides zero information about the four parameters (url, force, preset, entries). Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it fails completely. The agent is left to guess the meaning and semantics of force, preset, and entries from names 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 uses a specific verb ('Inspect') and resource ('URL metadata') and clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like ytptube_add_downloads and ytptube_create_tasks by explicitly stating it does not add to the download queue. This fully clarifies the tool's unique scope.

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 phrase 'without adding it to the download queue' implies when to use this tool: when you want metadata only and no queue mutation. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools (e.g., ytptube_inspect_task_url) or provide exclusionary guidance, so it's not a full 5.

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