Edit a playlist

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

Annotations already declare it non-destructive, idempotent, and open-world, and the description adds a genuinely non-obvious behavioral rule: the confirmation gate for visibility changes. It does not state partial-update semantics (whether omitted fields are preserved) or whether the playlist lookup by title can be ambiguous.

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 short sentences with zero filler; the primary action is front-loaded and the conditional constraint follows. Nothing is repeated from the title.

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 6-parameter mutation with no output schema, the definition covers the main fields and the confirmation workflow but omits what the tool returns, whether it is a partial or full update, and the failure mode when no editable field is provided. Adequate but with real gaps for a write operation.

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 50%, and the description compensates by tying the three editable fields (title, description, privacy) together and explaining the confirmation requirement that governs the confirmation_token param. The playlist parameter's id-or-exact-title semantics and the channel targeting are left to the schema.

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?

"Rename a playlist, change its description or privacy" gives a specific verb and resource plus the exact mutable fields, so an agent can separate it from create_playlist / delete_playlist / list_playlists. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly, so differentiation is inferred from the verb alone.

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 supplies one actionable condition: making a playlist public or unlisted requires the user's confirmation. It does not say when to reach for this tool versus set_visibility or update_video, nor what to do when no field is supplied, so usage is only implied.

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