v1_youtube_channel_lives

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the API endpoint, cost (1 credit), and a security note about not treating API responses as instructions. It implies a read operation via the verb 'Get' and GET endpoint. This is good behavioral transparency, though it does not mention permissions, rate limits, or response structure explicitly.

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: the first packs purpose, endpoint, cost, and input requirement; the second adds a critical behavioral warning. Every word earns its place, and the description is front-loaded with the most important information.

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 simple structure (3 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers purpose, cost, input requirement, and a security note. However, it lacks details on the response format (e.g., what fields are returned, pagination) and uses the ambiguous phrase 'one of' which could imply exactly one vs at least one. Some gap in completeness.

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 baseline is 3. The description restates the any-of requirement already present in the schema descriptions (e.g., 'any-of group — supply at least one'). It adds no new parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, and does not explain how to obtain or differentiate the identifier types.

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 'Get a YouTube channel's live streams', using a specific verb and resource. It naturally distinguishes from sibling tools like v1_youtube_channel_videos, v1_youtube_channel_playlists, etc., which target other content types.

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 says 'Requires one of handle, channelId, url,' which gives a prerequisite but does not explicitly compare to alternative tools (e.g., when to use this vs v1_youtube_channel_videos). Usage context is implied by the tool name and the 'Requires' line, but no when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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