ytdlp__get_video_metadata_summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns specific fields, requires http(s) URLs, and caps retries at 2, which is useful. However, it does not mention that this triggers a network fetch to an external video platform, potential access restrictions, or that no video content is downloaded.

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 a clear opening sentence, a @remarks line summarizing output, and explicit @param annotations. It is slightly long but every sentence adds value; no filler or 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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the tool's purpose, return fields, and all parameter constraints. It lacks information about error handling, network side effects, and relationship to sibling tools, but is reasonably complete for a metadata fetch tool.

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?

The input schema has 0% property descriptions, but the description's @param lines thoroughly explain every parameter: URL format, cookies file, proxy example, maxRetries cap/default, and response mode. This fully compensates for the lack of schema-level 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 clearly states the tool fetches and displays a human-readable metadata summary for a video URL via yt-dlp, and inventory the returned fields. It distinguishes from the sibling get_video_metadata by emphasizing 'human-readable summary', but does not explicitly state when to choose one over the other.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ytdlp__get_video_metadata, ytdlp__get_video_comments_summary, or download tools. The description implies a use case (getting metadata summary) but offers no exclusions, prerequisites, or comparison.

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