get_channel_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states 'Get information,' implying a read operation, but fails to mention auth requirements, potential rate limits, error behavior, or whether only public data is returned. This is a significant gap for a tool without annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes meaning, listing the resource and the specific data points returned. It is appropriately concise.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is fairly complete: it specifies the channel identifier and the expected return content. However, it omits details like whether the response includes channel thumbnails, description, or other metadata, and does not clarify if 'recent uploads' means a list of video IDs or full video objects. Minor gaps remain.

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% since the only parameter, channelId, has a description ('YouTube channel ID'). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. It does not clarify format, required scope, or valid values.

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 the specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource ('information about a YouTube channel') and enumerates the data returned (subscriber count, video count, recent uploads). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like get_video_info, get_transcript, and search_videos, which target other aspects of YouTube data.

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 implicitly conveys when to use the tool (when channel-level info is needed) by listing channel-specific fields, but it does not explicitly state exclusions or alternatives. For example, a user may need get_video_info for video-specific details, but no such guidance is given.

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