get_video

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get details' without specifying rate limits, authentication needs, quota costs, or the exact fields returned. The operation appears clearly read-only, but the minimal description does not enrich beyond the tool name.

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 directly states the tool's purpose. Every word is meaningful, with 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?

As a simple single-video fetch tool with no output schema, the description is mostly adequate. It could specify what 'details' includes (e.g., metadata, statistics), but given the simplicity and the clear contrast with list tools, it is reasonably 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?

The input schema already provides a full description of the videoId parameter, including its source ('from the watch?v= URL'). The tool description adds no extra parameter context beyond what the schema offers, so the baseline score 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 the verb 'Get details' and the resource 'single YouTube video by ID', which distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_subscriptions and list_feed. It precisely identifies what the tool does and 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 description implies usage when a specific video ID is known and details are needed, contrasting naturally with the sibling list tools. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives, so it lacks full explicit guidance.

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