get_video_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explains the tool returns metadata fields and an error message for unavailable videos. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether the tool is read-only. Since it implies a read operation without explicit safety guarantees, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

Two sentences convey purpose, input, and error behavior without redundancy. The most critical information is front-loaded. Every sentence serves a clear function, making it highly efficient.

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 (1 parameter, has output schema), the description comprehensively covers input format, returned metadata fields, and possible error scenarios. The presence of an output schema means return value details are omitted appropriately. No gaps remain for a basic metadata retrieval tool.

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% for the single 'video' parameter, with description already stating 'YouTube URL or video ID.' The tool description repeats this exact information without adding new details like allowed URL formats or examples. Thus, description adds no extra value beyond the schema, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 'Get YouTube video metadata' and lists specific fields (title, views, likes, comment count, upload date, duration, tags, and description). This verb+resource+scope approach distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_video_transcript or search_youtube, which serve different purposes.

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?

Description explicitly specifies input format: 'YouTube URL or video ID.' It also notes error conditions (private, deleted, unavailable). While it doesn't directly compare to siblings, the sibling names make usage context clear, and the input guidance is sufficient.

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