get_video_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only states the action and that it doesn't download; it omits any details about side effects, rate limits, error behavior, or return format. The lack of an output schema compounds this, leaving the agent unaware of what information is actually returned.

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 clear sentence with no redundant words. It delivers the core purpose and a key constraint ('without downloading') in the least space possible, making it concise and well-structured.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is too vague. It says 'information' without specifying what fields are returned (e.g., title, duration, formats). An agent cannot predict the output structure or know if it's suitable for its task. It also omits any caveats (e.g., network requirements, playlist behavior). This is a significant gap given the tool's informational purpose.

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%, so both url and flatPlaylist are documented in the schema. The tool description adds no extra parameter context beyond that, which is acceptable given the schema already covers semantics. This matches the baseline for full 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 action ('get information') and the resource ('video or stream URL'), and explicitly distinguishes from download tools with 'without downloading it.' This is a specific, unambiguous statement that differentiates it from sibling tools like download_video and download_stream.

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 phrase 'without downloading it' implies use when metadata is needed without fetching content, but no explicit contrast with alternatives (e.g., list_formats or search_videos) is given. There is no when-not-to-use guidance, so the agent must infer the intended usage from context.

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