add_to_playlist

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

Because annotations are entirely absent, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the action is adding a video to a playlist, without mentioning side effects, duplicate handling, authentication requirements, or what happens on success or failure. This is minimal but not misleading.

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 a single, short sentence with no filler or redundancy. It conveys the core action directly and front-loads the most important information, which is ideal for a simple tool.

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?

Despite the simple schema, the tool has no annotations and no output schema, so the description needs to provide more context to be fully reliable. It omits details about permissions, whether duplicates are allowed, and the outcome of the operation, making it incomplete for an agent that must invoke this mutation correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the schema already provides clear meaning for both parameters: video_id is the video to add, playlist_id is the target playlist. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond what the schema supplies, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Add') and a precise resource ('a video to a playlist'), making the tool's function immediately obvious. Among siblings like search_videos, get_playlist_videos, and like_video, this is the only tool that adds a video to a playlist, so it is clearly distinguished.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites such as playlist ownership or existing playlists. There are no exclusions or conditions provided, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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