manage_repository_hooks

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only, non-idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the actions but does not disclose side effects, required permissions, or failure modes. It is consistent with annotations but adds minimal behavioral context.

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 listing actions. It is efficient but could benefit from clearer structure, such as separating actions into a list or adding formatting. Still, it is well above minimal.

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 tool has 5 parameters, a nested settings object, and no output schema, the description should provide more context on how to use the settings parameter or the effects of each action. It is adequate but incomplete for complex usage.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 5 parameters. The tool description adds a brief explanation of the three actions (enable, disable, configure) but does not clarify the structure of the 'settings' object or provide examples. This matches the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 manages repository hook settings and lists specific actions (enable, disable, configure). This distinguishes it from the sibling 'list_repository_hooks' which is read-only, making the purpose and resource unambiguous.

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 when needing to change hook settings but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'list_repository_hooks' for inspection. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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