get_video_metadata

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that include_description is omitted by default to keep responses small, and it specifies valid input formats for the video parameter. It doesn't discuss rate limits, authentication, or error handling, but for a read-only metadata fetch, the transparency is adequate.

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 concise and well-structured, starting with the overall purpose, then providing usage guidance, and finally detailing arguments in a labeled format. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool's simplicity (2 parameters, output schema exists), the description is complete. It covers what metadata is returned, the input format, and an optional flag. The presence of an output schema means return values need not be described further.

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 input schema has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate entirely. It does so excellently: it explains the video parameter accepts various YouTube URL formats or a video ID, and the include_description parameter details its effect and rationale for omission.

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 retrieves a YouTube video's metadata (title, channel, etc.) and distinguishes itself from retrieving the transcript, as indicated by 'without fetching its transcript.' The verb 'get' and resource 'video metadata' are specific and differentiate from sibling tools like get_transcript.

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 advises using this tool for metadata questions without fetching the transcript, providing clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like get_most_replayed or build_video_link, which are siblings.

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