serp_youtube_locations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. While it states this is a 'utility tool' that 'gets list of available locations,' it doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like whether this is a read-only operation, what authentication might be required, rate limits, or what format the location list returns. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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, efficient sentence that clearly communicates the tool's purpose and usage context. It's appropriately sized for a utility tool and front-loads the essential information without any wasted words or unnecessary elaboration.

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?

For a utility tool with 3 parameters (1 required), 100% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description provides adequate context about what the tool does and which tools it supports. However, it lacks information about return format and behavioral characteristics that would be helpful given the absence of annotations. The description is complete enough for basic understanding but could be more comprehensive.

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%, with all three parameters well-documented in the schema itself. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides. According to scoring rules, when schema_description_coverage is high (>80%), the baseline is 3 even with no param info in description.

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: to 'get list of available locations' for specific YouTube SERP tools. It specifies the verb ('get') and resource ('list of available locations'), but doesn't distinguish it from the similar 'serp_locations' sibling tool, which appears to serve a parallel function for non-YouTube SERP tools.

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 explicitly lists the four specific tools this location utility supports: 'serp_youtube_organic_live_advanced, serp_youtube_video_info_live_advanced, serp_youtube_video_comments_live_advanced, serp_youtube_video_subtitles_live_advanced.' This provides clear guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives - specifically for YouTube-related SERP tools rather than general SERP tools.

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