get-video-info-for-summary-from-url

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool can 'get details or explanation' and 'get captions or subtitles', but fails to specify permissions needed, rate limits, error conditions, or output format. For a tool that likely involves external API calls, this lack of transparency is a significant gap.

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, consisting of a single sentence that efficiently communicates the core functionality. However, it could be slightly more structured by separating the two distinct purposes (details vs. captions) for clarity.

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 the complexity of interacting with YouTube videos (likely involving external APIs), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks crucial information about behavioral traits, error handling, and what the return values entail, making it inadequate for confident tool invocation.

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 fully documents both parameters (videoUrl and languageCode). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or usage notes for the parameters, resulting in the baseline score of 3.

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's purpose with specific verbs ('get details or explanation', 'get captions or subtitles') and identifies the resource ('YouTube video from a URL'). It distinguishes between two related but distinct functions (details/explanation vs. captions/subtitles), though without sibling tools to differentiate from, it cannot achieve a perfect 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusions. It merely lists what the tool does without context for application, leaving the agent to infer usage scenarios independently.

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