get_channel_latest

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the result limit (15 videos) and the cost profile (free), which is useful. However, it does not mention error behavior, invalid input handling, rate limits, or whether it is a read-only operation, though this is strongly implied.

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 front-loaded sentence that communicates the core purpose and the key cost detail with no filler. Every word earns its place.

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 simple single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is largely complete: it specifies the exact return scope, the input form is covered by the schema, and cost is disclosed. The only notable gap is lack of guidance on how it relates to get_channel_videos.

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%, so the schema already documents the channel parameter with an example and format options. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so 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 the verb 'Get' and the specific resource: the 15 most recent videos from a YouTube channel. It adds the concrete scope '15 most recent' and a cost/free signal, which helps differentiate it from search_youtube and get_transcript, but it does not explicitly distinguish it from the closely named sibling get_channel_videos.

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 gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like get_channel_videos or search_youtube. The 'FREE — no credits' note implies cost may matter, but it does not state conditions, exclusions, or when a different tool should be used instead.

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