Fetch recent videos from a single YouTube channel, returning them in newest-first order with a configurable limit.
Get the latest videos from one YouTube channel. The channel videos tab is newest first.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Page size from 1 to 50. Defaults to 10. | |
| channel | Yes | Channel handle or channel id. | |
| timeout_seconds | No | Timeout from 1 to 300 seconds. Defaults to 60. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact — results come back newest-first — but says nothing about pagination, how 'latest' is bounded, or what happens on a bad channel identifier.
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 short sentences with zero filler, and the core operation is front-loaded before the ordering caveat. Nothing in the text is redundant with the name or title.
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 three-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and strong annotations, this is nearly adequate, but there is no output schema and the description doesn't describe what a returned video record contains. The unresolved overlap with 'list_channel_videos' is the main completeness gap.
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%, with all three parameters (channel, limit, timeout_seconds) fully documented including ranges and defaults. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable but sets the baseline at 3 rather than higher.
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?
States a specific verb and resource: fetching the latest videos from a single YouTube channel, with an ordering guarantee ('newest first'). The purpose is clear in isolation, but the description never distinguishes it from the very similar sibling 'list_channel_videos' or 'search_channel_videos', leaving an agent unsure which to pick.
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?
There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance, and no mention of the near-identical siblings 'list_channel_videos' or 'search_channel_videos'. The only usage-adjacent sentence is a data-ordering note ('videos tab is newest first'), which describes output shape rather than tool selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.