get-video-transcript

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool retrieves full transcripts with timestamped captions and describes the return format, but it lacks details on error handling, rate limits, authentication needs, or whether it's a read-only operation (though implied by 'get').

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by details on parameters and returns in three efficient sentences with zero waste, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 2 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is mostly complete: it covers purpose, parameters, and return format. However, it lacks error cases or behavioral constraints (e.g., video availability), leaving minor gaps for a tool with no structured support.

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 fully compensates by explaining both parameters: videoId (required, YouTube video ID) and language (optional, with examples like 'en', 'ko', 'ja', and default behavior). This adds essential meaning beyond the bare 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 specific action ('Get the transcript/captions for a YouTube video') and resource ('YouTube video'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'get-key-moments' or 'get-segmented-transcript' by focusing on full timestamped transcripts rather than analysis or segmentation.

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 (to retrieve full transcripts with timestamps) and mentions optional language selection, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives like 'enhanced-transcript' or 'get-segmented-transcript' from the sibling list.

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