hound_inspect

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

The description transparently lists the outputs (licenses, vulnerabilities, etc.), indicating a read-only operation. However, it does not mention potential side effects like API rate limits or multiple external calls, though no annotations are provided to contradict.

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, efficient sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the key action and resource, listing contents concisely.

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's complexity (multiple data points) and no output schema, the description covers the main outputs well but does not detail return format or potential limitations, which would enhance completeness.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, only summarizing the tool's purpose.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'comprehensive profile of a package version'. It lists specific data points (licenses, vulnerabilities, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling tools like hound_vulns or hound_score which focus on individual aspects.

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 a comprehensive overview is needed, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor provides exclusions or when-not scenarios.

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