Get Video Details

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior, so the description does not need to repeat these traits. It adds minimal context by specifying the type of information retrieved ('detailed information about a YouTube video including URL'), but does not disclose additional behavioral aspects like rate limits, error conditions, or response format.

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 that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core functionality, making it easy for an agent to quickly understand the tool's intent.

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 low complexity (2 parameters, no output schema) and rich annotations (read-only, idempotent), the description is adequate but basic. It covers the purpose but lacks details on usage context, output structure, or error handling, which could enhance agent understanding despite the annotations.

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 schema fully documents both parameters ('videoId' and 'parts'). The description does not add any semantic details beyond what the schema provides, such as examples of valid 'parts' values or URL format specifics, meeting 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get detailed information about a YouTube video including URL'. It specifies the verb ('Get'), resource ('YouTube video'), and scope ('detailed information'), but does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling tools like 'videos_getComments' or 'videos_searchVideos', which also retrieve video-related data.

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 does not mention sibling tools such as 'videos_searchVideos' for finding videos or 'videos_getComments' for retrieving comments, leaving the agent without context for tool selection.

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