npm_hook_add

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive and non-read-only. The description adds valuable behavioral detail: the secret is never echoed back in responses, which is a security-relevant trait not captured in the schema or annotations. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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 concise, front-loaded sentences. It states the action, explains target formats, then defines endpoint and secret behavior without any redundant 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?

The tool has complete schema and annotations. The description explains target, endpoint, and secret behavior sufficiently for invocation. However, no output schema exists and the description doesn't mention what the response will contain, which would be helpful for a create operation.

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 target, endpoint, and secret. The description repeats these details and adds one new piece (secret is never echoed). Given the schema already handles the heavy lifting, the extra value is minimal, so a baseline of 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 opens with 'Create a registry webhook,' a specific verb+resource that clearly differentiates from sibling tools like npm_hook_list, npm_hook_get, npm_hook_update, and npm_hook_remove. It also enumerates valid target formats, which adds precision.

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 gives clear context on target types and endpoint requirements, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as npm_hook_update for modifying an existing webhook. The usage is implied by the verb 'create,' but no exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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