youtube-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the quota cost (50 units) which is valuable behavioral context, but doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens on success. The description doesn't contradict any annotations since none exist.

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 efficiently structured with purpose first, cost second, and parameters clearly listed. Every sentence earns its place, though the parameter documentation could be more integrated rather than in a separate Args section.

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 creation tool with no annotations but with output schema, the description covers the basic action and parameters adequately. However, it lacks important context about authentication needs, error handling, and doesn't leverage the existence of an output schema to reduce explanation burden about return values.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well by explaining all 3 parameters: title (required), description (with default), and privacy_status (with enum values and default). This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema, though it doesn't elaborate on parameter constraints or validation rules.

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 verb 'Create' and resource 'new playlist', making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'update_playlist' or 'list_playlists' beyond the obvious action difference.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_playlist' or 'list_playlists'. It mentions a quota cost but doesn't explain when creating a playlist is appropriate versus other playlist-related operations.

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