ytptube_list_archive

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the optional filtering behavior by archive IDs, which is useful, but does not disclose other behavioral aspects such as pagination or output format. It does not contradict the annotations.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the main action. It contains no redundant words or filler, earning a top score for efficiency.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 params, no output schema), the description covers the core behavior and parameter roles. However, it lacks details about return values or potential pagination/ordering, which would be helpful for an agent to fully anticipate the response.

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 explains that 'ids' is an optional filter for archive IDs and that the operation is scoped to a 'preset'. However, it does not define the expected values or meaning of 'preset' beyond the name, nor does it clarify the format of archive IDs.

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 identifies the action ('List'), the resource ('archive entries'), and the scope ('for a preset'), with an optional filter by 'archive IDs'. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_history or list_tasks, which target different resources.

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 implies the tool is used to list archive entries for a preset, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives, nor any exclusions. It does not mention when one would choose this over other list tools.

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