youtube-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes what the tool does (extract transcript text) and mentions default behaviors (auto-detect language, timestamps optional), but doesn't cover important aspects like error handling, rate limits, authentication requirements, or what happens with unavailable transcripts.

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 well-structured with clear sections (purpose, args, returns) and uses minimal, purposeful sentences. The formatting helps readability, though the 'Args:' and 'Returns:' headers could be slightly more concise.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity, no annotations, and the presence of an output schema (which handles return value documentation), the description provides adequate context. It covers the core functionality and parameters, though additional behavioral context would improve completeness.

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 three parameters: 'url' accepts YouTube URL or video ID, 'language' defaults to auto-detect, and 'with_timestamps' controls timestamp inclusion. This provides clear semantic meaning beyond the bare schema types.

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 specific action ('Get transcript text') and resource ('from a YouTube video'), distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'get_video_info' which presumably provides different video metadata. The purpose is unambiguous and well-defined.

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 for extracting transcript text from YouTube videos, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling 'get_video_info' tool. There's no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or alternative scenarios.

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