get_video_details

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get detailed information,' implying a read-only action, but it does not mention authentication requirements, potential failures for private/deleted videos, rate limits, or any operational caveats.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity comes at the cost of missing usage and behavioral details that would make the tool more self-explanatory.

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?

The tool is relatively simple with one parameter and an output schema, so the description does not need to explain return values. However, it lacks any routing guidance or behavioral caveats, making it minimally adequate for a straightforward retrieval tool but not richly complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It weakly ties the single parameter to 'a specific YouTube video,' which helps identify video_id's role, but it does not explain the expected format, requiredness, or constraints beyond what the bare parameter name already conveys.

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 states a clear verb ('Get'), a resource ('detailed information'), and a specific object ('a specific YouTube video'). It is instantly understandable, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like search_youtube_videos or get_channel_info.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not say that this is for retrieving details by a known video ID, nor does it contrast with search_youtube_videos or get_trending_videos. The context is only implied by the tool's name and the video_id parameter.

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