search_videos

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It only states 'search' and 'return structured metadata', omitting behavioral traits like rate limits, pagination, caching, or any side effects. Very limited transparency.

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?

Single sentence is concise but overly brief for a tool with 7 parameters and no schema descriptions. The front-loading is minimal; it could be structured better with key details upfront.

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 complexity (7 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations) and the existence of an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain optional parameters like published_after or search_order, leaving the agent unsupported.

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?

Description adds no meaning to any of the 7 parameters. Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the schema itself provides no parameter descriptions. The description does not compensate; it mentions only the main action, leaving all parameters uninterpretable.

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?

Description clearly states the tool searches YouTube videos and returns structured metadata. It distinguishes from siblings like analyze_channel or analyze_videos, which imply deeper analysis rather than search-and-return. However, it could be more specific about the metadata structure.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or context for choosing this over similar tools like collect_research_sources.

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