get-key-moments

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the tool's function (extracting key moments based on content density) and output format (structured text with timestamps and full transcript), which is helpful. However, it lacks details about potential limitations (e.g., accuracy of moment identification, processing time, or error conditions like invalid video IDs), which would be valuable for an agent to understand behavioral traits beyond basic functionality.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, starting with the core purpose in the first sentence. Each sentence adds value: the first defines the tool, the second explains the analysis method, and the third provides usage context and parameter details. However, the last sentence about return values could be slightly more concise, and the structure might benefit from separating parameter explanations into a distinct section.

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 moderate complexity (2 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, usage, parameters, and output format. However, without annotations or an output schema, it could improve by detailing error handling, performance characteristics, or more specifics on the 'structured output' format (e.g., JSON structure or text layout), which would help an agent invoke it correctly in edge cases.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It effectively explains both parameters: 'videoId' as the required YouTube video ID and 'maxMoments' as the optional number to extract with default (5) and maximum (10) values. This adds crucial meaning beyond the bare schema, though it doesn't specify format details for 'videoId' (e.g., length or pattern) or clarify that 'maxMoments' is a string type in the schema.

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 with specific verbs ('extract', 'analyzes', 'identify', 'creates') and resources ('key moments with timestamps from a video transcript'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get-video-transcript' (which likely retrieves raw transcript) and 'enhanced-transcript' (which might process transcript differently) by focusing on extracting structured key moments for navigation and summarization.

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 clear context for when to use this tool ('for easier navigation and summarization', 'useful for quickly navigating to important parts of longer videos'). However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention specific alternatives among the sibling tools, such as when a user might prefer 'get-video-transcript' for raw data or 'enhanced-transcript' for different processing.

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