get_youtube_subscriptions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that an OAuth2 access token is required, which is a critical behavioral prerequisite. However, it does not mention other behaviors like error handling, rate limits, or the nature of the response, but the output schema covers return structure. This is minimal but more than nothing.

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, front-loaded sentence states the action and the key requirement. No filler, no repetition of the tool name. It is an ideal concise format.

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 getter with one parameter and an output schema, the description tells the agent what it does and what it needs. It doesn't mention pagination or returned fields, but the output schema covers that. It is adequately complete for a straightforward read operation.

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. The description explicitly labels the access_token as an OAuth2 token and implies it is required, adding meaning beyond the schema's bare string type. However, it doesn't explain how to obtain or refresh the token, which sibling tools exist for that.

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') and a clear resource ('user's YouTube channel subscriptions'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_youtube_playlists and get_youtube_liked_videos by naming the exact resource. No ambiguity.

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 gives an implicit usage context (if you want subscriptions, call this), but provides no explicit guidance about when to choose it over alternatives or any exclusions. It does mention the OAuth2 requirement, which hints at a prerequisite, but does not mention sibling tools or conditions for alternative selection.

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