Get YouTube Video Transcript

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable behavior: it returns plain text with word count and detected language, and states results are cached locally. It also notes support for both auto-generated and manual captions. These details enrich understanding beyond the annotations, though it doesn't discuss error handling or rate limits.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main action ('Extract the full transcript from a YouTube video') and followed by concise details on caption types, output, and caching. Every sentence contributes meaningful information, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 tool with two parameters, robust annotations, and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the return value (plain text with word count and detected language). It also covers key behavioral aspects like caching and caption support. Combined with the schema and annotations, the tool is fully specified for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 both parameters clearly documented: video accepts an ID or full URL, and language specifies ISO 639-1 code with fallback behavior and a default. The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'Extract the full transcript from a YouTube video' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_video_info, get_chapters, or download_video, as no other sibling retrieves transcripts. The mention of supporting both auto-generated and manual captions further clarifies its scope.

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 usage context is clear: use this tool when you need the transcript of a YouTube video. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the tool's unique function among the siblings makes the when-to-use obvious. No misleading guidance is present.

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