VidLens

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

inspectChannel

Analyze YouTube channels to extract summary statistics and posting cadence heuristics, revealing upload patterns and content publishing frequency.

Instructions

Inspect a channel with summary stats and posting cadence heuristics. [~3-10s]

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "channelIdOrHandleOrUrl": "<channelIdOrHandleOrUrl>"
    },
    "name": "inspectChannel"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`channelIdOrHandleOrUrl`	Yes
`dryRun`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.8Apr 5, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Adds useful behavioral context with the '[~3-10s]' latency warning not found in annotations. However, fails to explain the 'dryRun' parameter's purpose (unusual for an inspection tool) or disclose whether results are cached, quota costs, or side effects.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Extremely efficient single-sentence description with bracketed performance metadata. Every element earns its place; no redundancy or verbose filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Adequate for a simple two-parameter tool: it establishes the core function and performance characteristics. However, significant gaps remain regarding the 'dryRun' parameter's semantics and the structure/contents of the returned analysis (no output schema exists to compensate).

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, requiring the description to fully document parameters. While 'channelIdOrHandleOrUrl' is somewhat inferable from the tool name, 'dryRun' is completely undocumented with no explanation of its effect on the operation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clear verb ('Inspect') and resource ('channel') with specific output details ('summary stats and posting cadence heuristics'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'listChannelCatalog' (list vs analyze) or 'inspectVideo' (entity level).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides implicit usage context through latency notation '[~3-10s]', but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus 'analyzePlaylist' or 'inspectVideo', and no mention of prerequisites or common workflows.

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