ytdlp__download_transcript

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses key behaviors: downloads to a temp dir, converts/strips timestamps and duplicates, then cleans up. It also notes maxRetries cap at 2. It omits potential failure modes but provides substantial internal process detail.

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 front-loaded with a one-sentence summary, followed by a structured @remarks block and param annotations. Every sentence adds value, and the format makes it easy to parse both behavior and parameter semantics without redundancy.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is quite complete: it explains the internal pipeline, temp file handling, cleanup, and all parameter semantics. It stops short of describing return values or error scenarios (e.g., missing subtitles), but it covers the essential context for safe usage.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must fully explain parameters. Each @param adds meaning beyond the schema: url protocol requirement, language default, output_dir conditional side-effect, cookies format, proxy, maxRetries cap, and response mode enum. This completely compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 states a specific action ('Download and extract plain-text transcript') and resource ('from a video URL using yt-dlp'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings that download raw subtitles or other media by emphasizing the plain-text transcription output.

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 when to use it (when you need a plain-text transcript) by explaining the VTT-to-text conversion and cleanup, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, such as when raw subtitle files are needed instead.

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