youtube_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context like 'without needing an API key' and describes the return shape, but it does not disclose potential limitations such as rate limits, result freshness, ranking behavior, or possible unreliability. This is acceptable but leaves room for more transparency.

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. Key behavioral information is front-loaded, and the usage guidance is appended cleanly. Every sentence 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 a complete input schema and an output schema present, the description covers the essential context. It could be more complete by explicitly positioning itself against youtube_research, but an agent can still select and invoke it correctly based on the current wording and schema.

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 little beyond the schema: it emphasizes querying and returning structured results but does not clarify parameter semantics or formats beyond what the input schema already documents.

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 action ('Search YouTube'), the target resource, and the specific output (structured list with IDs, titles, channels, durations, views, URLs). It also frames the tool's niche as discovery and candidate selection, which distinguishes it from siblings like youtube_transcript or youtube_video.

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 says to use it when discovering videos on a topic or finding candidates for research. It does not mention when not to use it or compare directly with alternatives such as youtube_research, but the guidance is clear enough for common use cases.

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