yt-consolidado

find_emerging_channels

Discover emerging YouTube channels using composite filters for channel age, subscribers, views, duration, and region; report shortfalls instead of relaxing filters automatically.

Instructions

Emerging channels by composite filters — the product tool.

Layer: Data API. Quota: 100 per discovery page + 1 per 50 channels enriched
+ 3–5 per channel verified (~130–450 for a default run).
``small_channel_video_cap`` also enumerates channels with few uploads, so an
old channel that only started publishing last week is still caught.
Shortfalls are reported, never padded: filters are not relaxed automatically.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "find_emerging_channels"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`n`	No
`query`	Yes
`dry_run`	No
`region_code`	No	US
`sample_size`	No
`subscriber_max`	No
`subscriber_min`	No
`discovery_pages`	No
`min_video_views`	No
`relevance_language`	No	en
`max_avg_duration_min`	No
`max_channel_age_days`	No
`min_avg_duration_min`	No
`max_candidates_checked`	No
`small_channel_video_cap`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the burden well: it declares the quota model (100/page, +1 per 50 enriched, +3–5 per verified, ~130–450 for a default run) and the shortfall contract ('reported, never padded; filters are not relaxed automatically'). It does not state that the call is read-only or what dry_run does, leaving small gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Short and front-loaded, with the quota math parenthetically condensed rather than sprawled. But 'the product tool' is meaningless filler and the fragmentary 'Layer: Data API' style leaves the main sentence doing less work than it could.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but for a 15-parameter, zero-annotation discovery tool the definition is thin: no sibling routing and almost no per-parameter meaning. The quota and shortfall disclosure is genuinely helpful and partially offsets this.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% across 15 parameters, so the description must compensate — but it only explains small_channel_video_cap (and does so usefully, noting it catches old channels that began publishing recently). The other fourteen parameters, including sample_size, discovery_pages, max_candidates_checked, and the duration bounds, get no semantic clarification.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a clear resource — emerging channels selected by composite filters — with an implicit find/list verb. However, it never distinguishes itself from the near-identical sibling find_breakout_creators, and the tagline 'the product tool' adds no discriminative information.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No when-to-use guidance and no mention of the obvious alternatives (find_breakout_creators, search_channels, youtube_search). An agent must infer from the name alone which discovery tool to pick; the only context offered is quota cost, which is not a usage criterion.

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

Deploy Server