Ytdlp Embed Assets

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). It does not mention side effects, authorization needs, rate limits, or what happens on errors. The annotations carry the burden, and the description fails to add value.

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 extremely concise (two sentences) and front-loads the core action. Every sentence is meaningful and there is no fluff.

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 (13 parameters, nested objects, 0% schema coverage), the description is too brief. It lacks guidance on required vs optional parameters, output format, and error handling. The presence of an output schema (not visible) does not excuse the lack of contextual help in the description.

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%, and the description only lists the types of assets that can be embedded (subtitles, thumbnail, etc.) without explaining the parameters or their usage. The description does not compensate for the missing parameter descriptions, leaving the agent with minimal guidance on how to configure the tool.

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 the action ('Download a media URL and embed subtitles, thumbnail, metadata, chapters, or infojson into the output file'), specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ytdlp_download_video by the embedding goal, and mentions the exact assets being embedded.

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 a clear usage scenario: 'Use when the user asks for a self-contained media file with embedded assets.' This tells when to use the tool, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among siblings. It is good but not exhaustive.

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