youtube_get_transcript

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses caching ('cache-aware'), auto-saving to the library, and the side effect of a potential yt-dlp download. This provides useful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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?

Two sentences efficiently convey the main action, key features (cache-aware, auto-save), and an important side effect. No fluff; every word earns its place.

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 has no output schema, so the description should explain the return format. It does not. Additionally, the concept of 'library' is undefined, and error scenarios (e.g., missing transcript) are not addressed. Given the simplicity of the tool, this is a significant gap.

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 does not add additional meaning to individual parameters beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., video is URL/ID, lang is BCP-47, fresh bypasses cache).

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 fetches a video's transcript using yt-dlp, with caching and auto-saving. It distinguishes from sibling tools like youtube_search and youtube_save_summary, though not explicitly, but the verb 'fetch' and resource 'transcript' make it distinct.

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 a potential one-time download on first use, hinting at a performance consideration, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions.

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