List Playlist Items

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open world). The description adds two traits the annotations cannot express: playlist ordering of results and the quota cost of 1 unit per page of up to 50 results, which is genuinely useful for cost planning. Auth/permission requirements are still unstated.

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?

Three short lines, each earning its place: what it returns, the key special-case usage, and the quota cost. The most important operational fact (quota) is present without preamble or repetition.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and the description covers ordering, pagination page size, quota, and the uploads_playlist_id trick. It omits any note on access constraints (private vs. public playlists, ownership) and on how limit interacts with page_token.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by revealing that uploads_playlist_id is a valid value for the 'playlist' parameter and by disclosing the 50-per-page page size relevant to page_token/limit. It does not clarify limit vs. page_token interaction.

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 opening line names the resource and its ordering ('Videos in a playlist, in playlist order'), which distinguishes it from list_playlists/get_playlists that return playlist containers rather than their contents. It is a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb, and it never names a sibling, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

It gives a concrete usage recipe: pass the channel's uploads_playlist_id to enumerate everything a channel uploaded. That is real when-to-use context. It does not state exclusions or point to alternatives (e.g. get_videos or search for cross-playlist lookups), so it is clear but not exhaustive.

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