Get Video Info

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context by mentioning the use of yt-dlp --dump-json and listing metadata fields returned. It does not detail network behavior or error handling, but the added implementation detail and output field list provide value beyond the annotations.

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 sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists output fields without unnecessary words. Every element serves a clear function.

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 simple single-parameter tool, no output schema, and strong annotations, the description sufficiently covers the return values by listing metadata fields. It is complete enough for an agent to understand what information will be provided and how to invoke the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100% with a detailed description of the url parameter ('YouTube, Vimeo, or any yt-dlp supported URL'). The tool description only says 'video URL' and adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it gets metadata about a video URL and lists specific fields (title, duration, resolution, fps, filesize, thumbnail, description). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like download_video and download_audio, which focus on downloading rather than metadata retrieval.

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 purpose of 'get metadata' is clearly distinct from downloading, implying usage when metadata is needed rather than actual content. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives, so it lacks explicit exclusion guidance but provides clear context.

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