update_video_metadata

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds useful context about the video being published and the channel being authenticated, but it does not disclose that existing metadata will be overwritten, whether changes are reversible, or any rate limits or permission requirements beyond authentication.

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 clear sentence in Portuguese, front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word is purposeful with no redundancy.

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?

For a mutation tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential what and when, and the schema covers the parameters. Missing details like return value or error behavior are not critical given the tool's simplicity, but could be added for full 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%, and the schema already describes each parameter including constraints (e.g., title max 100 chars). The description adds the word 'otimizados' (optimized), implying the values are pre-computed, but it does not add semantic detail to individual parameters beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses a specific verb 'Aplica' (applies) and clearly identifies the resource as 'título, descrição e tags' of a video. It also specifies scope ('já publicado no canal autenticado'), which differentiates it from the sibling tools that are all search/analysis tools.

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: it is for already-published videos on the authenticated channel, implying the tool is for modifying existing content rather than creating or analyzing. No explicit alternatives or exclusions are stated, but the sibling list contains no other update tools, making the use case clear.

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