get_tutorial_steps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description need not cover safety. It adds context about pattern identification but omits details on response format or edge cases (e.g., no steps found).

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 plus a structured 'COMBINE WITH' list. No redundant information, front-loaded with purpose, every part earns its place.

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 two-parameter tool without output schema, the description covers the basic extraction purpose and usage context. It lacks explicit mention of return format but is adequate for common use.

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% with descriptions for both parameters (videoId and language). The description does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema provides, staying at 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'extract' and resource 'step-by-step instructions from a tutorial video', specifying patterns like 'numbered steps, first/then/next'. This distinctly separates it from siblings like get_video_summary or get_video_outline.

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 COMBINE WITH section explicitly advises when to use other tools for code (extract_code_snippets), links (find_github_links), or visuals (get_video_frames). It implies this tool is for instructions, providing clear context for alternative usage.

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