YouTube Playlist MCP

Remove videos from a playlist

remove_videos_from_playlist

DestructiveIdempotent

Remove specified videos from a user's YouTube playlist after explicit approval, deleting all occurrences and confirming the destructive account change.

Instructions

Remove videos from one of the user's playlists (all occurrences). DESTRUCTIVE, WRITES TO THE USER'S ACCOUNT: only after explicit approval. Costs 50 units per removed item.

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": {
      "playlist_id": "<playlist_id>",
      "video_ids": "<video_ids>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>"
    },
    "name": "remove_videos_from_playlist"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`confirm`	Yes	Must be true. Only set it after the user explicitly approved this exact change in the chat.
`video_ids`	Yes
`playlist_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is known; the description earns credit for adding what annotations cannot convey - that removal hits all occurrences of a video in the playlist, that it consumes 50 units of quota per removed item, and that approval must precede the call. It stops short of saying what happens to videos not present in the playlist or how partial failures are reported.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two tightly packed sentences with the destructive warning front-loaded, then the approval gate, then the quota cost. No filler, no restatement of the tool name or title.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a destructive 3-parameter mutation with no output schema, the definition covers the essentials an agent needs to act safely: destructiveness, approval precondition, blast radius (all occurrences, up to 50 items) and cost. Minor gaps remain around error/partial-failure behavior and playlist ownership prerequisites.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 33% - just `confirm` is documented - so the description carries more burden than usual. It partially compensates via '(all occurrences)' and 'per removed item', which clarify video_ids semantics and the cost multiplier, but playlist_id gets no added meaning and the 50-item cap and ID format are left entirely to the schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('Remove videos from one of the user's playlists') plus a scope qualifier '(all occurrences)' that meaningfully distinguishes it from a hypothetical single-instance removal. Against the sibling set, the add/remove, get and preview operations are unambiguously separable without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It gives an explicit gating condition: only call after the user has explicitly approved this exact change. That is real usage guidance, but it is purely a safety gate - there is no routing to alternatives, notably preview_playlist or get_playlist_items, which an agent should arguably consult before an irreversible removal. No 'when not to use' is stated.

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

Deploy Server