force_hook

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

Annotations lack destructiveHint, but the description explicitly calls it 'GUARDED', requires confirm:true, and states it changes the running game and is audited. It also explains the tagging mechanism for game objects.

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?

Four sentences efficiently cover purpose, JSON limitations, tagging, and requirement. No fluff, front-loaded with key action and guarded status.

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 tool with 3 params and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter format, confirm requirement, and side effects. Missing potential error behavior, but sufficient for intended use.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that args can be tagged with __ent, __ply, __vec, __ang formats, providing concrete examples beyond the schema.

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 it runs hook.Run(name, ...) to exercise a gamemode path, which is specific. It distinguishes from siblings like read_hooks (read-only) and run_lua (generic code execution), though not explicitly.

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 implies usage for testing without reproducing the situation, and requires confirm:true. However, it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use compared to alternatives.

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