get_normalized_url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action ('returns normalized URL') without disclosing edge cases, error handling, side effects, or the meaning of 'normalized.' For a simple tool this is minimally transparent, but significant behavioral context is missing.

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?

The description is very concise: one sentence plus an Args block. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and contains no redundant or irrelevant information. Every element 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 single-parameter, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the basic function and parameter meaning. However, it does not explain what 'normalized' entails, the exact return format, or how this differs from sibling tools. This leaves some contextual gaps for an agent deciding between tools.

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 'url' parameter (0% coverage), but the description's Args section explains it as 'The YouTube URL to normalize.' This adds meaningful semantics beyond the raw string type, adequately compensating for the lack of schema documentation.

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 tool's function: 'Returns the normalized YouTube URL for a given URL.' This uses a specific verb (returns) and resource (normalized YouTube URL), and the purpose is distinct from sibling tools like get_watch_url and get_thumbnail_url, which return different URL forms.

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: when given a YouTube URL, this tool normalizes it. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over the sibling tools, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives. The usage context is clear but not elaborated.

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