ytdlp__healthz

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that it verifies yt-dlp, python3, node and _ytdlp_cookies_lib.sh availability and returns yt-dlp version in JSON, adding meaningful behavioral detail beyond a generic health check.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by @remarks for specifics. The @param line is slightly redundant with the schema but does not add excess verbosity.

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?

For a simple health check with no output schema, the description adequately explains what is verified and that the result is a JSON with the yt-dlp version. It omits error behavior, but this is a minor gap for a health check.

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 0%, but there is only one self-explanatory parameter with enum and default. The @param line repeats the optional nature and default values from the schema, providing minimal additional meaning.

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 'Check whether ytdlp bundle runtime dependency is available' with a specific verb and resource, and it lists the exact dependencies in @remarks. This distinguishes it from sibling healthz tools by naming the ytdlp bundle specifically.

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 purpose makes the usage context clear: use this tool to verify ytdlp bundle dependencies. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the bundle-specific naming and the healthz sibling set provide implicit differentiation.

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