Find Hook Pattern

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, which cover the read-only behavior. The description adds a valuable behavioral detail beyond annotations: 'Consumes 2 orchyn credits,' which is important for an agent deciding whether to invoke the tool.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the tool's function and output format; the second adds the credit cost and the intended use case. Every sentence contributes essential information.

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?

For a read-only analysis tool with a complete input schema, an output schema, and read-only/idempotent annotations, this description is sufficient. It explains what the tool produces, what it consumes, and when to use it, so an agent can select and invoke it correctly.

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%: username, limit, and platform each have descriptions in the schema. The tool description does not add parameter-level detail, but it doesn't need to because the schema already fully documents the parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific action ('Extract') and a specific resource ('a creator's repeatable formula'), and defines the concrete output: fill-in-the-blank templates another creator could adapt. This clearly separates it from siblings like write_hooks or analyze_post by focusing on reverse-engineering a creator's pattern rather than creating or analyzing a single post.

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 explicitly tells the agent when to use the tool: 'Use to reverse-engineer a creator you want to learn from.' This provides clear context for invocation, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state when not to use it.

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