getVideoInfo

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It lists the return fields and mentions pagination tokens, but does not clarify that comment content is not included, nor does it address error handling, authentication, or rate limits. The description provides basic information but lacks depth.

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, focused sentence that is front-loaded with the primary purpose ('Get YouTube video metadata') and follows with specific details. No wasted words; it earns its place.

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?

The description adequately covers the key metadata fields and mentions pagination tokens, which is useful for a video info tool. However, it does not explain how the pagination tokens relate to sibling comment tools, nor does it mention any output structure or potential limitations. It is complete enough for simple usage but lacks some contextual depth.

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 fully documents the sole parameter 'url' with a clear description ('YouTube video URL or video ID'), so the schema already provides the necessary semantic meaning. The tool description adds no extra parameter context beyond what the schema offers, aligning with the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 retrieves YouTube video metadata and lists specific fields (title, views, publish date, channel, comment count). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like getTranscript, getComments, and searchYoutube, which cover different aspects.

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 implies the tool is for fetching video metadata, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool over getComments or getTranscript, nor does it mention exclusions like 'use getComments for actual comment text'. The usage context is implied rather than stated.

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