list_channel_videos

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations, the description adds meaningful behavioral context: the operation is free, does not spend credits, requires a Starter plan, and only returns recent uploads. This helps an agent understand cost and entitlement implications without repeating annotation data.

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 concise, front-loaded sentences state the core action, accepted input forms, cost behavior, and plan requirement. Every sentence carries useful information with no redundancy or filler.

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?

For a simple one-parameter, read-only tool with good annotations and a clear description, the content fully covers purpose, input, cost, and access restrictions. No output schema exists, but for a list operation this is acceptable; the description is complete for tool selection and invocation.

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?

The schema fully documents the single parameter ('Channel @handle, URL, or UC… id'), and the description repeats that same input guidance. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds no significant additional semantic value beyond what the schema already provides.

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 a specific verb ('Resolve') with a clear resource ('a YouTube channel handle, URL or id') and result ('recent uploads'). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools that handle transcripts, watchlists, or analysis.

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 clearly states when to use the tool: to resolve a channel handle/URL/id to recent uploads, and adds access context ('Requires the Starter plan or higher'). It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use it, but the context is clear enough for an agent.

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