youtube_search

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 credit costs, endpoint verification status (and the actual working endpoint), pagination token usage, and the shared endpoint behavior. However, it does not mention rate limits, authentication, or error handling.

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 slightly long but well-structured, starting with the core purpose, then credits, endpoint notes, pagination, verification, and return format. Every sentence adds value, though it could be tightened.

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 complexity (multiple result types, pagination) and no output schema, the description provides a detailed return structure and explains pagination and endpoint behavior. It covers most key aspects but omits error handling and rate limits.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context for sp (pagination and filter examples) and search_query (identifying the tool), but country and language are already well-documented in the schema. The description adds marginal value beyond the schema.

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 it scrapes YouTube search results for any query and lists the types of data returned (videos, channels, shorts, etc.). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like youtube_video or youtube_channel by focusing on search.

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 mentions that the presence of search_query selects Search behavior and explains pagination, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like youtube_video or youtube_channel. No exclusions or when-not-to-use scenarios are given.

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