Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
kazuph

@kazuph/mcp-youtube

by kazuph
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Servidor MCP de YouTube

Usa yt-dlp para descargar subtítulos de YouTube y lo conecta a claude.ai mediante el Protocolo de Contexto de Modelo . Pruébalo preguntando a Claude: "Resume el video de YouTube <>". Requiere que yt-dlp esté instalado localmente, por ejemplo, mediante Homebrew.

¿Cómo puedo hacer que esto funcione?

Instalar yt-dlp (Homebrew y WinGet funcionan muy bien aquí)

# macOS
brew install yt-dlp

# Windows
winget install yt-dlp

Parámetros

  • url : URL del vídeo de YouTube (obligatorio)

  • language : Código de idioma de los subtítulos (opcional, predeterminado: 'ja')

    • Utiliza códigos de idioma ISO 639-1

    • Códigos de lenguaje comunes:

      • ja : japonés

      • en : Inglés

      • ko : coreano

      • zh : chino

      • fr : francés

    • Nota: Se producirá un error si no existen subtítulos en el idioma especificado.

Ejemplo

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "youtube": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "@kazuph/mcp-youtube"]
    }
  }
}

Available Tools

1 tool
get_youtube_transcriptC

Download YouTube video transcript and metadata

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes
languageNo

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states 'Download', which implies a read operation, but it does not mention potential issues like missing transcripts, language availability, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The description lacks sufficient behavioral context.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is extremely concise at only 6 words, with no wasted text. However, it is also under-specified, lacking structure or front-loading of key details. It meets minimal conciseness but at the cost of completeness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the absence of annotations, output schema, and schema descriptions, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not address parameter details, return format, error conditions, or usage prerequisites. The agent would lack necessary context to use the tool effectively.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the input schema provides no descriptions for the 'url' and 'language' parameters. The tool description does not mention or clarify any parameter semantics, failing to add meaning beyond the bare schema. This is a critical gap.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Download' and the resource 'YouTube video transcript and metadata', which is specific and unambiguous. However, it does not detail what metadata is included, but it is still clear enough for an agent to understand the tool's purpose. Since there are no sibling tools, no differentiation is needed.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (none exist), nor does it specify prerequisites, limitations, or context. It simply states what the tool does without any usage advice, leaving the agent without decision support.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 1 tool updatev1.0.0
    • First observedget_youtube_transcript
Deploy Server
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

B3/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

Only one tool exists, so there is no risk of confusion between tools.

Naming Consistency5/5

With a single tool, naming is inherently consistent.

Tool Count4/5

A single tool is borderline but appropriate for a focused purpose like transcript retrieval.

Completeness4/5

The tool covers the core functionality of getting transcripts and metadata, though additional features like searching videos could be expected.

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches