Fetch YouTube Videos

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

The description reveals useful behavioral details such as the returned video fields and the sort order (playlist/channel order). Annotations already cover the read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive nature, so the description adds value without needing to restate those.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action, and includes only essential details about return values and sorting. No filler or 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?

For a simple list tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, return data, and ordering. It could be slightly more complete by referencing alternative tools, but overall it is sufficient.

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 schema provides complete descriptions for both parameters (url and limit), so the description does not need to add param-specific meaning. It does echo the url parameter's source types but offers no additional semantic depth.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and a clear resource ('videos from a YouTube playlist or channel'), and specifies the return fields (IDs, titles, durations, upload dates, URLs) and ordering. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_videos, which focuses on keyword search.

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 implies the tool is for listing videos from a playlist or channel, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus search_videos or other alternatives. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided.

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