Get YouTube Video Info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the specific metadata fields returned, but does not disclose error behavior, rate limits, or prerequisites. With annotations present, the extra context is useful but not extensive.

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 concise sentence that leads with the action and resource, followed by a clear list of return fields. Every word adds value, with no redundant information.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining return values, which it does by enumerating all metadata fields (title, channel, duration, etc.). For a simple single-parameter, read-only tool with comprehensive annotations, this is complete.

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%, fully explaining the 'video' parameter as either an ID or full URL. The description adds no additional parameter syntax or constraints beyond the schema, so score matches the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 gets detailed metadata for a single YouTube video, with a specific verb and resource. It lists the return fields, which distinguishes it from siblings like get_transcript and get_comments that fetch different aspects of a video.

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 when to use the tool via 'single YouTube video', indicating it is for individual video metadata rather than search or channel-level info. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as using fetch_videos for multiple videos.

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