find_github_links

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's additional detail about returning 'clickable links' and searching transcript/description adds value. It does not contradict annotations and discloses the scope of search.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. No wasted words.

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 a single parameter, no output schema, and clear annotations, the description sufficiently covers purpose, scope, and return type. Could mention handling of different GitHub link formats, but it's adequate.

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 description coverage is 100% (one parameter 'videoId' with a clear description). Description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting baseline.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('extract') and resource ('GitHub repositories, gists, and code resource links'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'extract_links_mentions' (general links) and 'extract_code_snippets' (code samples not necessarily links).

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 specifies the context: 'Searches both transcript and video description.' It implies when to use (when needing GitHub links from a video) but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, which keeps it clear but not fully elaborated.

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