get_youtube_playlists

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the OAuth2 requirement, which is useful context, and the 'Get' verb implies a read-only operation. However, it does not state error behavior, pagination, or scope (owned vs saved playlists). This is partial but not rich behavioral disclosure.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. No filler. The parenthetical auth requirement is the only extra detail and it earns its place, as it's essential for invocation.

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 an output schema present, return values are covered. The description adds the essential auth context and clearly identifies the resource. However, it omits usage guidance (when to choose this over siblings) and any scope clarification (owned vs saved playlists). For a simple tool with an output schema, it is mostly complete but not fully.

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 explicitly identifies the access_token parameter as an OAuth2 token, adding meaning beyond the bare schema field name. It also implies the token is required despite the schema default null. This is meaningful, though it doesn't explain token source or format.

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 specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('user's YouTube playlists'), and the auth requirement. The YouTube namespace in the name and description clearly distinguishes it from Spotify's get_current_user_playlists/get_user_playlists and other YouTube read tools like get_youtube_subscriptions. Purpose is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description only mentions a prerequisite (OAuth2 token) and does not name sibling tools or conditions for choosing this over get_youtube_subscriptions or search_youtube_videos. There is no exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance.

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