v1_youtube_video_transcript

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

The description mentions it uses a GET request, costs 1 credit, and warns that API responses are data not instructions. However, without annotations, it lacks details on auth requirements, rate limits, 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 very concise with three short sentences. It is front-loaded with the purpose, then cost, then a safety warning. No unnecessary 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 the tool is simple with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and cost. However, it lacks parameter explanations and behavioral details like what happens if the video has no transcript.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage but all parameter descriptions are just the parameter names (e.g., 'url', 'handle', 'channelId'), providing no additional meaning. The description does not explain what each parameter does.

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 the transcript of a YouTube video or short.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like transcript tools for other platforms.

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 includes cost and a safety warning but provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as when a video might have no transcript or when to use other video-related tools.

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