search_youtube_search

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 a timeout parameter with a default value, which hints at potential performance constraints, but doesn't describe what happens when the timeout is reached, what format results are returned in, whether authentication is required, rate limits, or error conditions. This leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 extremely concise with just two sentences that directly state the purpose and parameters. Every word serves a purpose with zero wasted text, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a search tool. It doesn't explain what kind of results are returned (video metadata, URLs, thumbnails), how results are structured, whether pagination is supported, or any limitations on search scope. For a tool with 2 parameters and no structured output documentation, this leaves too many unanswered questions.

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?

The description provides basic parameter information ('query (string), timeout (int, default 90)'), but the input schema already has 100% description coverage with clear documentation for both parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond what's already in the structured schema, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 as 'Search YouTube videos', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_bing_search or search_google_search by specifying the YouTube platform, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them in the description text itself.

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 like search_google_search or search_bing_search. There's no mention of when YouTube-specific searches are preferred, what types of content this tool is best for, or any prerequisites for usage.

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