Hook Detector

list_research

The research findings counted from Hook Detector's shared index of public YouTube data: openings (which openings sit before a steeper or flatter first minute of YouTube's "most replayed" heatmap, replay intensity, not retention), title-devices (which title devices go with higher multiples, by niche) and title-thumbnail-overlap (title and thumbnail word overlap against the multiple). Each page with n per run and how many claims reproduced on a second sample of other channels, did not, or had too few videos. No key needed; limited per address (429). Free. Same as GET /v1/findings.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_research"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 27, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral load, and it does contribute genuinely useful context: no API key needed, rate limiting per address with 429s, and free access. It does not, however, explain pagination beyond 'each page with n per run', nor whether the list is scoped or filtered, leaving operational behavior partly unclear.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is a dense, comma-spliced run-on that front-loads an awkward clause rather than the action. Much of the middle parenthetical detail (which openings precede a steeper first minute, replay intensity not retention) reads as domain color and is hard to parse, and some of it duplicates what the output schema likely conveys.

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

Completeness4/5

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 need not be spelled out, and the description supplies auth/rate-limit context plus a conceptual map of the three research categories — enough for a no-argument listing call. It falls short only in not clarifying ordering, pagination mechanics, or how this differs from get_research.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain. Baseline 4 applies; the description's mention of paging ('each page') at least signals that results come in pages, though with no inputs the agent has no levers to reason about.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description conveys that this returns research findings counted from a shared public YouTube index and enumerates the three metric families (openings, title-devices, title-thumbnail-overlap). However, the phrasing 'The research findings counted from...' is not a clean verb+resource statement, and it does nothing to distinguish this from close siblings like get_research, list_finds, or find_hooks beyond the reference to GET /v1/findings.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. An agent gets an implied context (browsing published research) but no condition selecting this over get_research (which fetches a single finding) or list_finds. It notes it is 'same as GET /v1/findings' but that is a REST mapping, not usage guidance.

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?