Separate Stems from YouTube

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It discloses the server fetches, separates, and returns file paths in MP3 BEST quality, but omits details like authentication, rate limits, or whether files are temporary. The polling behavior is implied via the wait parameter but not described.

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?

Two sentences that are direct and succinct. Every word contributes essential information, and the key action is front-loaded.

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 complexity (5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the core functionality well: input format, output format, and quality. It lacks explanation of timeout, polling intervals, and output directory behavior, but these are detailed in the schema. Overall, it is adequate for an AI agent to understand the tool's purpose.

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 input schema covers 60% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by explaining the overall process and output (vocals+instrumental MP3, local paths), which clarifies the context beyond raw parameter names. It does not detail each parameter individually but the schema already does that.

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 states the specific action: submit a YouTube URL to separate vocals and instrumental MP3 files. It identifies the source (YouTube) and output (local file paths), distinguishing from siblings like separate_soundcloud.

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 explicitly states to use 'for any youtube.com or youtu.be URL', providing clear context. It does not mention when not to use or list alternatives, but the sibling name separate_soundcloud implies the differentiator.

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