Check if a package is allowed by a hextrap firewall and verify it is not a suspected typosquat. Call this BEFORE suggesting any npm, PyPI, or Go dependency to ensure it meets security policy.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Package name to check | |
| registry | Yes | Package registry | |
| firewall_id | Yes | Firewall public ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses two specific behavioral traits: firewall policy evaluation and typosquat detection. Minor gap: does not clarify if this is read-only or whether it logs audit entries, though 'check' and 'verify' imply inspection.
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?
Two sentences with zero waste. First defines the operation; second defines the temporal protocol. Every word serves selection or invocation guidance. Appropriate length for complexity.
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?
Appropriately complete for a security validation tool. Covers the dual security checks (firewall policy and typosquatting) but could briefly indicate what constitutes a pass/fail result given the lack of output schema documentation.
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 has 100% coverage (baseline 3). Description adds value by mapping the 'registry' enum to concrete ecosystems ('npm, PyPI, or Go') and contextualizing 'firewall_id' as 'hextrap firewall', clarifying the security domain semantics.
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 states specific verbs ('Check', 'verify') and resources ('package', 'hextrap firewall', 'typosquat'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like add_to_allowlist or get_proxy_config by focusing on pre-installation validation of dependencies.
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?
Provides explicit temporal guidance ('Call this BEFORE suggesting') and enumerates specific use cases ('any npm, PyPI, or Go dependency'). Uniquely clarifies the workflow integration point, ensuring agents invoke it prior to recommendation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
