search_channel_videos

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description adds only the cursor pass-through rule for paging; it says nothing about result shape, empty-result behavior, or quota/rate implications of openWorld access.

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 with no filler, the core action front-loaded and the pagination rule following it. Every clause earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description is the only place to learn what the 'listing' contains, and it does not say. Combined with the absence of sibling differentiation against list_channel_videos, an agent has enough to invoke it but not enough to choose it confidently.

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 coverage is 100%, so every parameter (limit, query, cursor, channel, timeout_seconds) is already documented, setting the baseline at 3. The description's note about passing the cursor unchanged for the next page slightly enriches cursor semantics but adds nothing for channel format or query matching behavior.

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 with clear scope: 'Search videos within one YouTube channel and return the listing.' The channel-scoped search is distinguishable from a generic search, though the description never names the obvious sibling list_channel_videos, so an agent must infer the search-vs-list distinction.

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 only usage guidance is pagination: 'Pass cursor unchanged for the next page.' There is no statement of when to pick this over search_youtube (site-wide) or list_channel_videos (unfiltered listing), which is the primary selection decision for this family of tools.

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