hook_api_lookup

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

The description clearly implies a read-only operation with 'Offline', suggesting no state modification or network dependency. Since there are no annotations, this disclosure is essential and adequately conveys the non-destructive behavior, though it doesn't detail permissions or rate limits.

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?

The description is a single, concise sentence (16 words) that is front-loaded with the action and key details. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

While the description specifies the type of metadata returned, it lacks details on output structure or examples for the 'category', 'role', and 'hazard' fields. Given the absence of an output schema, more explanatory context would improve completeness, though the tool is simple.

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 description coverage is 100% with the 'name' parameter having an example list. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, aligning with the baseline score of 3 when schema is already complete.

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 clearly states the tool looks up a Hook API function and specifies the kind of metadata returned (category, exit/guard role, security hazard metadata). It uses a specific verb-resource pair and distinguishes itself from sibling tools that deal with account hooks, transactions, or state, as this focuses on API function definitions.

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?

The description mentions 'Offline', indicating no network call is needed, which implies usage context but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_hook_definition or inspect_hook_wasm. No when-not or alternative tools are named.

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