Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
YouTube MCP

YouTube MCP

by pratikgh0se
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

youtube_import_takeout

Import local Google Takeout YouTube history files (JSON or HTML). Load your watch history into derived analytics for detailed viewing data analysis.

Instructions

Import a local Google Takeout YouTube-history JSON or HTML file into local derived analytics.

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": {
      "inputPath": "<inputPath>"
    },
    "name": "youtube_import_takeout"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputPathYesLocal path to a Google Takeout watch-history file ending in .json, .html or .htm (max 25 MiB).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / inputPath / description
      Added value: +"Local path to a Google Takeout watch-history file ending in .json, .html or .htm (max 25 MiB)."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It provides some behavioral context by defining the output as 'local derived analytics' rather than just 'processing,' which is useful. However, it offers no details on system constraints, processing time, or specific limitations beyond the input format.

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?

The single sentence is highly dense and perfectly constructed, front-loading the core function while embedding necessary constraints (format and scope) efficiently. There is no unnecessary language.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given that this is a local file processing utility, the description is highly complete. It specifies the input source, format, and the resulting action (analytics). The lack of an output schema means the description could be slightly more explicit about the nature of the 'derived analytics,' but for a tool designed to ingest local files, it is sufficient.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Even though the schema coverage is 100%, the description adds critical semantic value by specifying the accepted file types (.json, .html, .htm) and the size constraint (max 25 MiB). These details clarify the nature of the 'inputPath' beyond just being a generic string path.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

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

The description is highly specific, clearly stating the action ('Import'), the resource (Google Takeout YouTube-history), the acceptable formats (JSON or HTML), and the ultimate purpose ('local derived analytics'). This immediately distinguishes it from the vast array of server-side YouTube API tools listed as siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

While it doesn't provide explicit 'when-not' guidance, it clearly sets the context: this tool is for local files created via Google Takeout. Given the massive list of API-focused siblings, this highly specific scope serves as excellent operational guidance for the agent.

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