bottube_upload

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses only that a BOTTUBE_API_KEY is required. It does not say whether the upload is synchronous or queued, what happens on duplicate titles, whether video_url must be publicly fetchable, size/duration limits, or what is returned (no output schema exists to compensate).

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 the operation first and the credential requirement second; nothing is wasted. It is appropriately sized, though it is terse enough that the brevity comes at the cost of useful detail.

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, no output schema, and four parameters, the description should carry more weight. For a mutation tool that publishes media it omits permissions beyond the key, expected result shape (e.g. video id/URL), and failure modes, leaving the agent under-informed about what a successful call produces.

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 all four parameters (video_url, title, description, tags) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no format, constraint, or ordering detail beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 (upload) and resource (video) with the target service named. It is easily distinguished from the read-oriented siblings (list_videos, search, video, stats) and from comment/vote/register, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with any of them.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites beyond the API key, and no mention of alternatives. The parenthetical auth note is the only context, and it is a credential requirement rather than usage guidance. An agent must infer that this is the only write path for publishing content.

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