youtube_listing

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose key behavioral traits: return fields and the transcript limitation caused by server token restrictions. It does not mention authentication, rate limits, or ordering, but for a read-only listing tool this is reasonably transparent.

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 two sentences with no filler. The first sentence defines purpose and modes, the second covers return fields and a critical limitation. Every sentence 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?

For a simple 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it covers the three listing modes, what fields are returned, and the main constraint. The schema covers parameter details like limit and pagination behavior, so the description does not need to repeat those.

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?

All three parameters are already described in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds minimal new parameter semantics. It does clarify the target parameter's meaning per kind, but this is already present in the schema description, so no extra value beyond the baseline.

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 lists videos from YouTube, enumerates the three specific modes (Shorts, videos, search), and lists return fields. It is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools which focus on Google Trends, Google Ads, and Play Reviews.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool (for listing YouTube videos from channels/search) and explicitly states a limitation (transcripts unavailable). However, it does not name alternative tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance beyond the transcript caveat, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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