YouTube Studio MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Channel overview

get_channel

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves the signed-in channel's profile and lifetime public statistics, including subscribers, total views, video count, creation date, country, handle, description, keywords and topics.

Instructions

The signed-in channel's profile and lifetime public stats: subscribers, total views, video count, creation date, country, handle, description, keywords and topics.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_channel"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the description only needs to add scope. It usefully clarifies that results are lifetime rather than time-windowed and are restricted to the authenticated channel, but says nothing about freshness, caching, or permission failures for an unauthenticated caller.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource and its scope first, then the field list. Every clause carries information; nothing is padded or repeated from the schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need no narrative, and the parameterless nature means little else must be explained. The description covers target and scope adequately; only freshness or auth-failure behavior is unaddressed, which is minor here.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Zero parameters, so the schema baseline is 4; the description correctly makes clear that no channel identifier is required because the signed-in channel is used implicitly. That implicit targeting is the main semantic value added.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a concrete resource and scope: the signed-in channel's profile plus lifetime public stats, and enumerates the metrics returned (subscribers, views, video count, etc.). This distinguishes it from time-ranged siblings like get_metrics_over_time, though no sibling is named explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: 'signed-in channel' and 'lifetime' signal when this tool is the right one (no filters, no date range, own channel). There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement or pointer to alternatives such as get_performance_summary.

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