hook_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Offline', implying no network calls, but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, has authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects. The description lists what the report includes but not behavioral traits.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with purpose and components. It is efficient but could be slightly more concise by removing redundant phrasing like 'One-call comprehensive report on a Hook' followed by a colon list.

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?

Given the complexity (5 unannotated parameters, no required fields, 0% schema coverage), the description fails to explain what inputs are necessary or how to use them. The presence of an output schema excuses return value details, but input side is severely incomplete.

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 0%, meaning the schema has no parameter descriptions. The description does not mention any of the 5 parameters (grants, hookOn, wasmHex, namespace, wasmBase64), leaving the agent with no guidance on which to provide or their formats. This is a critical gap.

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 produces a comprehensive report on a Hook, listing its components (structure, classification, security analysis, HookOn decode, fee estimate). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like inspect_hook_wasm or classify_hook by being a one-call aggregate.

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?

It says 'One-call comprehensive report' and 'Combines inspect + classify + analyze + estimate', implying this is the go-to tool for a full overview rather than calling individual tools. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context is clear.

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