tubemind-secure-mcp

suggest_hook_angles

Generate five video hook angles for openings by analyzing patterns from top-performing videos in your niche to prioritize the most effective approach.

Instructions

Gera 5 ângulos de gancho (hook) para a abertura de um vídeo. Usa padrões detectados nos vídeos mais populares do tópico para priorizar o gancho mais eficaz no nicho.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "videoTopic": "<videoTopic>",
      "niche": "<niche>"
    },
    "name": "suggest_hook_angles"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`niche`	Yes	Nicho do canal
`regionCode`	No	Região: BR, US, PT, ES, AR	BR
`videoTopic`	Yes	Tópico ou assunto do vídeo
`targetAudience`	No	Público-alvo (opcional)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.3Aug 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds context about using patterns from popular videos to prioritize effective hooks, but it does not disclose output format, limitations, or any side effects. The behavioral insight is limited to the methodology.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the action and only contains essential information. It is concise with no redundant phrases.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a generation tool with all parameters described in the schema, the description conveys the output (5 hook angles) and the method, which is sufficient for basic invocation. However, it lacks details about how regionCode or targetAudience affect results, though the schema provides some context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides about how parameters influence the generated hooks.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool generates 5 hook angles for video openings, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like suggest_tags and analyze_title_patterns by focusing exclusively on hook angles for the video opening.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage during video planning to select an effective hook, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as suggest_tags. No exclusions or comparative guidance is provided.

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

Deploy Server