youtube_auth_exchange_code

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions side effects (creating a local token file) but does not describe error handling, idempotency, or requirements like valid OAuth scopes. The agent may not know consequences of invalid codes or overwriting existing files.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence with a clear verb and object. No redundant words, front-loaded with the core action.

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 complexity of OAuth flows and lack of output schema, the description is too brief. It does not place the tool in the broader authentication process (e.g., that the code comes from youtube_auth_url) or describe the return value (token file path). Sibling tools imply a sequence, but this is not explicitly stated.

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 provides no description for the 'code' parameter (0% coverage). The description adds meaning by labeling it as an 'OAuth authorization code', but lacks details on format or source, leaving the agent uncertain about expected input.

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 action ('Exchange'), the resource ('a pasted OAuth authorization code'), and the result ('for a local token file'). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like youtube_auth_url (which provides the code) and youtube_auth_status (which checks auth state).

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 description implies usage after obtaining an authorization code, but it does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives. It lacks guidance on prerequisites or when not to use, such as if a token file already exists.

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