get_youtube_insights

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions what the tool returns (transcript, metadata, summary) but lacks critical details: whether this requires API keys or authentication, rate limits, error handling, or if it's a read-only operation. For a tool fetching external data, this is a significant gap.

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 front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 complexity (fetching and processing YouTube data) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return formats, error cases, or behavioral constraints, leaving the agent with insufficient context for reliable invocation.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters (url, languages, summary_sentences) with descriptions and defaults. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying the tool processes a YouTube video URL, which is already covered by the schema.

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: 'Get comprehensive insights from a YouTube video including transcript, metadata, and a brief summary.' It specifies the verb ('Get'), resource ('YouTube video'), and scope ('insights'), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_youtube_metadata and get_youtube_transcript, which likely provide more limited outputs.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (get_youtube_metadata and get_youtube_transcript). It doesn't mention prerequisites, alternatives, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based on tool names alone.

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