Hook Detector

get_call

One call of a priced tool (titles and the tools after it): tool, credits, charged, status (pending, done, failed), request and result. Same as GET /v1/calls/{call_id}. Free. Errors: 404 call_not_found.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "call_id": "<call_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_call"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`api_key`	No
`call_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose useful behavior: the call is free, it mirrors GET /v1/calls/{call_id}, and it fails with 404 call_not_found. It does not state auth expectations for the api_key parameter, rate limits, or explicitly that it is a non-mutating read.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Very compact and front-loaded: purpose, returned fields, REST equivalence, cost, and error are all packed into a few clauses with no filler. The parenthetical 'titles and the tools after it' is slightly cryptic and could be clearer, but no sentence is wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be spelled out. For a simple single-record getter the description covers purpose, cost, and error behavior adequately, but with zero annotation coverage and 0% schema coverage the unexplained api_key parameter is a real gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It partially does by referencing the /v1/calls/{call_id} path, implying call_id identifies the record, but the api_key parameter is never mentioned or explained anywhere, leaving one of two parameters fully undocumented.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('get_call', 'One call of a priced tool') and enumerates the returned fields (tool, credits, charged, status, request, result), plus the exact REST equivalent. It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling list_calls, but 'One call' conveys singular retrieval clearly enough for an agent to distinguish.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: fetch a single call by ID when you already have the call_id, versus list_calls for enumeration. The description never states when to prefer this over list_calls or what preconditions apply, leaving the agent to infer from the name.

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

All Hook Detector tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?