get_hook

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well to enumerate the output structure, clarifying that this is a read-only lookup and what data will be returned. However, it omits behavior for invalid hook names or potential error responses, which is a minor gap.

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 sentence using a dash-separated list to pack all relevant details in a front-loaded, efficient manner without any fluff.

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 simple read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential information by listing exactly what will be returned. It could mention error cases or relationship to other hook-related tools, but overall it is adequately complete.

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 a descriptive enum and example for the only parameter. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, keeping the baseline at 3.

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's function: retrieving full details for a DS utility hook. It specifies the exact contents (signature, returns, category, RSC safety, subpath, description, import snippet), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_component and list_hooks.

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 use when complete hook information is needed, but it does not explicitly differentiate from alternatives like list_hooks for exploring available hooks or get_component for component details. No exclusions or when-not-to-use scenarios are provided.

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