Hook Detector

list_strategies

The hook strategy library: every kind of long-form hook the shared index holds at least 3 openings of, with its plain name, count, the median multiple of those videos over their channels' usual views, the median hook length in seconds, the template most share, and up to 3 real examples (title, hook as said, video_id, channel, multiple). Counted from the index, never by a model; public data only. Free. Same as GET /v1/strategies.

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_strategies"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`q`	No	a subject: only openings of videos whose title or channel match its words
`api_key`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 27, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden well: it discloses provenance ('Counted from the index, never by a model'), data scope ('public data only'), cost ('Free'), and the aggregation threshold of at least 3 openings. It does not mention rate limits, pagination, or authentication behavior, but it is substantially more transparent than a bare list tool.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the resource and then efficiently lists the returned fields, provenance, cost, and endpoint. The first sentence is dense, but every clause contributes useful information about the strategy library rather than repeating schema or annotation details.

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?

For a list/read tool with an output schema, the description is largely complete: it explains what the strategy library contains, how the data is counted, what is returned at a high level, and that access is free and public. The main remaining gap is parameter/auth guidance, but the output schema reduces the need to explain return values in more detail.

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?

The only meaningful filter, q, is documented in the schema, but the description adds no parameter-level meaning or filtering behavior beyond that. The api_key parameter is undocumented in both the schema and the description, so the description does not compensate for the 50% schema coverage gap.

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?

The description clearly identifies a specific resource: a library of long-form hook strategies with aggregate metrics and examples. It implies a list/read operation and distinguishes itself conceptually from individual-hook tools by saying every strategy has at least 3 openings, but it does not explicitly name a sibling alternative.

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 implied by 'The hook strategy library' and the endpoint mapping, so an agent can infer this is the tool for browsing strategy clusters. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus siblings like find_hooks or find_long_hooks, and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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?