videos_searchVideos

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 but offers minimal information. It doesn't describe whether this is a read-only operation, how results are returned (e.g., pagination, sorting), rate limits, authentication needs, or what the response looks like. This leaves significant gaps for a search tool.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and appropriately sized for a simple search tool, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (search with parameters), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain behavioral aspects like result handling or error conditions, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool effectively beyond basic parameter passing.

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 input schema already documents both parameters ('query' as search query and 'maxResults' as maximum results). The description doesn't add any meaningful context beyond this, such as query syntax examples or result format details, but meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 'Search for videos on YouTube' clearly states the verb (search) and resource (videos on YouTube), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'channels_listVideos' or 'videos_getVideo', which might also retrieve videos through different mechanisms.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when this search-based approach is preferable over direct retrieval tools like 'videos_getVideo' or 'channels_listVideos', nor does it specify any prerequisites or exclusions for usage.

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