Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
YouTube MCP

YouTube MCP

by pratikgh0se
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

youtube_get_channel

Read-only

Retrieve a public YouTube channel using its UC... channel ID to view channel details.

Instructions

Get a public YouTube channel by ID.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "channelId": "<channelId>"
    },
    "name": "youtube_get_channel"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
channelIdYesChannel ID (UC...) of the channel to look up.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / channelId / description
      Added value: +"Channel ID (UC...) of the channel to look up."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that only public channels are retrievable, which is genuinely useful context, but says nothing about failure behavior for private/nonexistent IDs or any quota implications.

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 short sentence with zero filler, and the key constraint ('public', 'by ID') is front-loaded.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With no output schema, the description could state what a channel record contains or that lookup by handle/username is unsupported. It covers the minimum needed to call the tool but leaves the return shape entirely unexplained.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single channelId parameter is fully documented in the schema, including the UC... format hint. The description adds no meaning 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.

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb+resource pair (get / public YouTube channel) and constrains it to lookup by ID. It is distinguishable from youtube_my_account and youtube_get_video, though the description never names a sibling explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance: no mention of when to prefer youtube_my_account or youtube_search over this, and no statement about prerequisites (API key, quota). The word 'public' hints at the scope but nothing tells the agent when this tool is the right choice.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools