List channel videos

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value by specifying the stats are 'lifetime' and 'public' — distinguishing them from the analytics siblings — but it does not mention caching or the fact that a full sync can be forced, leaving that to the schema.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource comes first and the returned data is stated immediately. Nothing in it is redundant with the title.

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?

With annotations, a full output schema, and complete parameter documentation, the description is adequate for calling the tool correctly. It is thin for selection, however: it does not distinguish this list operation from search_videos or explain how public lifetime stats differ from the separate analytics 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and all six parameters (sort, limit, format, offset, refresh, channel_id) carry their own descriptions, including the cache note on 'refresh' and the default-channel fallback on 'channel_id'. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('channel's uploaded videos') plus what is returned ('lifetime public stats (views, likes, comments)'). It is clear what the tool does, but it never contrasts itself with the nearby youtube_search_videos sibling, so an agent must infer the boundary between listing a channel's uploads and searching videos.

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?

Usage is only implied: listing implies you already know the channel, while filtering/searching would suggest another tool. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and none of the 14 sibling tools (notably youtube_search_videos and youtube_get_video_analytics) are named as alternatives.

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