playlists_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the quota cost (1 unit) and the OAuth token requirement for mine=true, which are valuable behavioral traits. It implies read-only nature via 'Get'. Additional details like error behavior or pagination are not covered, but the key operational constraints are present, placing it above average.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The main action is front-loaded, and the critical constraint is stated immediately. Every word earns its place, achieving high 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?

For a list operation with 9 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential usage context: the filter requirement, authentication nuance, and quota cost. It does not explain return format or pagination details, but given the schema already lists pageToken and maxResults, the description is reasonably complete for the tool's complexity.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds critical semantics by enforcing that exactly one of id, channelId, or mine must be provided, which is not obvious from the schema alone. It also clarifies that mine=true requires OAuth, complementing the schema's mention. This adds meaningful guidance beyond the structured data.

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 'Get YouTube playlists' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling 'playlistItems_list' by focusing on playlists, not playlist items. The filter requirement further clarifies 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?

It explicitly states that exactly one filter (id, channelId, or mine=true) is required, which is strong usage guidance. It also clarifies authentication requirements for mine=true. However, it does not mention when to use this vs. other playlist tools or list alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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