Get YouTube video details

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. The verb 'Get' signals a read-only operation and the phrase 'details, statistics and content details' gives a basic sense of the response. It does not mention authorization requirements, account usage, rate limits, error behavior, or response format, but for a simple video lookup this is minimally adequate.

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 short sentence that front-loads the action and the resource. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant information.

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?

This is a low-complexity tool with one required parameter, so the description is close to sufficient. However, there is no output schema and the description does not clarify what shape the details/statistics take or whether the optional account parameter affects which video data is accessible, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.

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%, so the schema already explains videoId and account. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the parameters already convey, 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 ('Get') and a clear resource ('a video'), and even hints at the data categories returned: details, statistics, and content details. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling YouTube tools such as search or my_videos, so it stops short of a 5.

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 implied by the name and the required videoId: this is for retrieving details of a specific video. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over get_video alternatives like google_youtube_search or google_youtube_my_videos, and no stated exclusions.

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