google_youtube_my_videosList a user's uploaded YouTube videos with account selection and pagination options to browse results page by page.
List the user's uploaded videos.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| account | No | Account nickname to use. | |
| pageToken | No | Token from a previous page's nextPageToken. | |
| maxResults | No | Max videos (default 25). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.95Input schema / properties / pageTokenAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Token from a previous page's nextPageToken.",
+ "type": "string"
+}v0.1.30Input schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -falsev0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it says nothing about pagination behavior, result ordering, quota/rate limits, or what a response contains. For a read-only list this is lower risk, but the description adds essentially no behavioral context beyond the verb 'List'.
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 or repetition. It is efficiently sized, though its brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined compression.
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 no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain at least the shape of returned items (video IDs, titles) and that results are paginated via pageToken. None of that is present, leaving the agent unable to predict the response or paging loop.
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%, with account, pageToken, and maxResults all documented in the schema, so the schema does the heavy lifting and a baseline 3 applies. The description adds nothing about how account selection or paging interacts with results.
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 and resource ('List the user's uploaded videos'), and the possessive 'user's' usefully distinguishes it from the general google_youtube_search tool. However, it does not explicitly name or differentiate against google_youtube_get_video or google_youtube_list_playlists, so the agent must infer the boundary.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this versus google_youtube_search or google_youtube_get_video, and no mention of prerequisites such as needing an authenticated account or the account parameter selecting among multiple accounts. The agent is left to infer everything from the one-line purpose.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.