Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
YouTube Channel MCP

YouTube Channel MCP

by joinhackyard
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Research a topic on YouTube

research_topic
Read-only

Search YouTube for recent videos on a topic, rank them by breakout ratio (views versus uploader subscribers), and summarize title patterns and typical duration for content research.

Instructions

Searches YouTube for recent videos on a topic and ranks them by breakout ratio (views ÷ the uploader's subscribers: above 1 means it reached far beyond its audience), with title patterns (length, numbers, questions, common words) and typical duration. Costs about 102+ quota units per call.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "research_topic"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNo
orderNoviewCount
queryYes
channelNoWhich connected channel: channel ID (UC...), @handle or name. Omit to use the default channel.
durationNoshort <4 min, medium 4-20, long >20.
max_resultsNo
region_codeNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds real behavioural context beyond the annotations: the exact quota cost (102+ units per call) and a definition of the breakout ratio used for ranking, which matters for interpreting results. It still does not say how many results come back by default or whether the call is cached, so the disclosure is partial rather than rich.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Two sentences, well front-loaded: capability and ranking method first, cost last. The parenthetical explaining the breakout ratio prevents misreading, though the first sentence is dense enough to be a single run-on.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 7-parameter tool with no output schema, the description does cover the return shape (ranked videos, title patterns, duration) reasonably. But the majority of parameters remain undocumented across both schema and description, so an agent cannot confidently set days, order, max_results or region_code from this definition alone.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 29% — days, order, max_results and region_code have no schema descriptions at all. The description does not compensate, offering nothing on what the ordering options mean, how the day window interacts with results, or what region_code changes.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ("Searches YouTube for recent videos on a topic") and immediately clarifies the ranking logic, so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not name a sibling such as find_outliers, which is the nearest neighbour in this toolset, so differentiation is left slightly implicit.

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?

The word "recent" combined with the quota-cost note gives an implied when-to-use cue, and the cost warning helps an agent decide whether to spend the call. However, there is no explicit when-not guidance and no mention of alternatives like find_outliers or get_analytics.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools