get_channel_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It implies a read-only operation ('Get') and specifies accepted input formats, but it doesn't disclose any error behavior, auth requirements, or edge cases. For a simple getter this is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single sentence that announces the action, lists expected result fields, and clarifies accepted input variations. No filler or redundant clauses; every word earns its place.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers both input formats and expected return fields. It doesn't describe error cases or optional behavior, but these are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity and the details provided.

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%, and the schema's parameter description is nearly identical to the tool description ('YouTube channel URL, @handle, or channel ID'). The description adds no meaningful semantics beyond the schema, 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') with a clear resource ('YouTube channel information') and enumerates the exact fields returned (title, description, counts, country, thumbnail). This makes it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like get_channel_videos or search_within_channel.

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 makes the tool's purpose obvious: fetching channel-level metadata. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the context is clear enough to route an agent to this tool when channel info is needed rather than videos or comments.

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