sassy_hooks_deactivate

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It states the action but does not mention side effects, reversibility, required permissions, or the impact on currently active hooks. 'Deactivate' implies mutation, but without safety context the agent cannot judge the consequences of invoking this tool, especially when clearing all hooks.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second sentence defines the parameter. There is no redundant wording or filler, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 a single optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and parameter usage. The main gaps are the lack of behavioral safety information and explicit usage comparisons with siblings, but the description is sufficient for basic invocation and understanding of the core 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?

The description fully explains the only parameter hook_name with concrete semantics: a specific hook name to disable, or an empty string to disable all hooks. This directly compensates for the 0% schema coverage and leaves no ambiguity about parameter meaning.

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 states a specific action ('Deactivate') on a specific resource ('hook') with clear scope ('a hook or all hooks'). It immediately distinguishes itself from sibling tools like sassy_hooks_activate and sassy_hooks_list, leaving no ambiguity about the operation.

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?

Provides clear operational context: the parameter hook_name can be a specific hook or empty to clear all. This tells the agent when to supply a value and the effect of omitting it. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools (e.g., activate, list) or state conditions to avoid using this tool, so it falls just shy of full guidance.

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