Community Post Details

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

Adds context the annotations do not: it consumes paid API credits, needs confirm=true, and clarifies that the read-like POST does not publish to any social platform. That last point meaningfully de-risks the readOnlyHint=false / openWorldHint=true annotation by explaining the write-like transport is non-publishing. It stops short of describing cost magnitude or failure modes.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and the returned fields, followed by cost/safety notes. Dense but every clause earns its place; 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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by listing the fields that come back, so an agent knows what to expect. Cost, confirmation requirement, and non-publishing behavior round out the picture for a single-record detail tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents url, account, and confirm. The description only echoes the confirm=true credit requirement and adds no new meaning for the url or account parameters, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Retrieves the full details of a YouTube community post') and enumerates the returned fields (text, images, like count, publish date, channel info, linked video). This clearly separates it from the listing sibling youtube_channel_community_posts, though the sibling is not named explicitly.

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?

Gives a concrete prerequisite ('requires confirm=true') for the credit-consuming call, which is real usage guidance. However, it never states when to reach for this tool versus youtube_channel_community_posts or how to obtain the post URL, leaving usage largely implied.

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