search_videos

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it mostly restates the tool's purpose and the filters already present in the schema. It does not mention output shape, rate limits, authentication needs, or any side effects, so significant behavioral context is missing.

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 one compact, front-loaded sentence that states the verb, resource, and key filter dimensions with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a tool whose parameter details live in the schema.

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?

The input schema is rich enough for calling the tool, but there is no output schema and the description gives no hint of what a successful search returns. It also undersells the schema by saying 'videos' while the type parameter supports channels and playlists, so additional context would improve completeness.

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%, and every parameter already has a clear description with defaults and duration thresholds. The tool description only lists filter categories that are already in the schema and adds no new semantic detail, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 provides a specific verb (Search), resource (YouTube videos), and a distinctive filter set (upload date, duration, sort order, content type). It is clearly broader than search_within_channel or search_transcript, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling search tools like search_within_channel or search_transcript. An agent must infer from tool names that this is the general YouTube search, and no exclusions or alternative routing are mentioned.

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