An MCP server that audits and optimises your own YouTube channel — impressions, CTR, retention, search terms and metadata quality, with opportunities ranked by recoverable views.
13 tools with clear verb-noun naming and mostly complete schemas. Descriptions are present but often generic (avg ~60 chars, below 194-char baseline). Parameter descriptions exist but lack detail on constraints, formats, and valid ranges. No output schemas documented. Error handling and recovery guidance absent. Security considerations (auth scopes, token handling) not visible in tool definitions. Composition is sound, tools are single-purpose and chainable via IDs.
Analyze audience retention patterns for a video
Analyze search terms driving traffic and their coverage in metadata
Check authentication status and required scopes
Identify videos with improvement opportunities ranked by recoverable views
Query YouTube Analytics API for channel or video metrics
Get information about the authenticated user's YouTube channel
Get audience retention data for a specific video
Output schemas not documented. LLMs cannot predict response structure, forcing them to guess at field names and types for downstream tool chaining.
Parameter descriptions lack format constraints and valid ranges. E.g., 'limit' has no min/max; date params lack ISO 8601 format guidance; 'cohort' and 'type' enums not documented in descriptions.
No error handling or recovery guidance. Tools lack descriptions of failure modes, retryability, or what the LLM should do if a call fails (e.g., 'video not found, try list_videos first').
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-23 | F | 49 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
Get search terms that drove traffic to a video or channel
Get detailed metadata for a specific video
Import a YouTube Studio analytics export CSV file
List all videos in the catalog with their metadata
Analyze and score video metadata quality
Sync the local video catalog with your YouTube channel
Destructive/write operations (import_studio_export, sync_catalog) lack confirmation or dry-run support. No tool description warns of side effects or irreversibility.
Tool descriptions are generic and under 100 chars on average. Missing WHEN to use each tool, prerequisites (e.g., 'requires auth_status to pass first'), and how results differ from similar tools.