fetch_youtube_transcript

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the payment requirement ('0.02 USDC on Polygon'), which is a key constraint, but it does not explain how payment is processed or how the payment_tx_hash parameter is used, leaving ambiguity.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that packs purpose and a key requirement efficiently. It contains no fluff and every phrase adds value.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is incomplete for a paid tool. It does not explain the payment mechanism, how to provide a transaction hash, or what happens without payment, leaving critical usage details missing.

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%, so the description should compensate for explaining parameters. It only hints at the URL via 'any YouTube video' and mentions payment cost, but it does not clarify the 'url', 'language', or 'payment_tx_hash' parameters, their formats, or defaults.

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 extracts full transcript and timestamps from any YouTube video into Markdown format. It specifies the resource (YouTube video), the action (extract transcript), and the output format, distinguishing it from sibling content-fetch tools.

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 implies usage for YouTube transcript extraction, clearly different from siblings that handle web content, PDFs, or plain text. However, it does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use this tool, only that payment is required.

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